General Plan Update - City of Inglewood

City of 

August 2006 

General Plan Update 

Technical Background Report

CITY OF INGLEWOOD 

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE 

Final Technical Background Report 

Prepared for 

City of Inglewood 

P.O. Box 6500 

Inglewood, California 90312 

Prepared by 

EIP Associates 

12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430 

Los Angeles, California 90025 

In association with 

Meyer, Mohaddes Associates, Inc. 

707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 4810 

Los Angeles, CA 90017 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates 

11661 San Vicente Boulevard, Suite 306 


and 

Terry A. Hayes Associates LLC 

8522 National Boulevard, Suite 102 

Culver City, CA 90232 

August 2006

Contents 

CHAPTER 1 Introduction .................................................................................... 1-1 

1.1 Background........................................................................................... 1-1 

1.2 General Plan......................................................................................... 1-1 

1.3 Technical Background Report........................................................... 1-2 

1.4 Regional Setting ................................................................................... 1-3 

1.5 General Plan Planning Area............................................................... 1-3 

CHAPTER 2 

CHAPTER 3 

Community Development.............................................................2.1-1 

2.1 Land Use............................................................................................ 2.1-1 

2.2 Housing.............................................................................................. 2.2-1 

2.3 Economic Trends and Conditions................................................. 2.3-1 

Infrastructure.................................................................................3.1-1 

3.1 Water System..................................................................................... 3.1-1 

3.2 Sewer and Wastewater ..................................................................... 3.2-1 

3.3 Storm Drains ..................................................................................... 3.3-1 

3.4 Solid Waste ........................................................................................ 3.4-1 

3.5 Electricity ........................................................................................... 3.5-1 

3.6 Natural Gas........................................................................................ 3.6-1 

3.7 Telecommunications ........................................................................ 3.7-1 

3.8 Circulation.......................................................................................... 3.8-1 

CHAPTER 4 Community Services .....................................................................4.1-1 

4.1 Schools ............................................................................................... 4.1-1 

4.2 Recreation and Parks........................................................................ 4.2-1 

4.3 Library Services................................................................................. 4.3-1 

CHAPTER 5 

CHAPTER 6 

Environmental Resources.............................................................5.1-1 

5.1 Biological Resources......................................................................... 5.1-1 

5.2 Hydrology and Water Quality......................................................... 5.2-1 

5.3 Topography and Hillsides ............................................................... 5.3-1 

5.4 Visual Resources............................................................................... 5.4-1 

5.5 Historical and Cultural Resources.................................................. 5.5-1 

5.6 Air Quality ......................................................................................... 5.6-1 

Community Safety and Hazards...................................................6.1-1 

6.1 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources ......................................... 6.1-1 

6.2 Seismic Hazards................................................................................ 6.2-1 

6.3 Flood Hazards................................................................................... 6.3-1 

City of Inglewood General Plan Update Technical Background Report 

iii

Contents 

6.4 Fire Hazards ......................................................................................6.4-1 

6.5 Hazardous Materials.........................................................................6.5-1 

6.6 Police Services...................................................................................6.6-1 

6.7 Fire Services.......................................................................................6.7-1 

6.8 Emergency Preparedness.................................................................6.8-1 

6.9 Noise...................................................................................................6.9-1 

CHAPTER 7 Synthesis of Planning Issues........................................................... 7-1 

• Appendices 

Appendix A City of Inglewood General Plan Update Economic Conditions 

and Trends Report 

Appendix B Sensitive Species Potentially Occurring within the City of 

Inglewood 

Appendix C Facilities on LUFT List for the City of Inglewood 

• Figures 

Figure 1-1 Southern California Regional Map................................................................ 1-5 

Figure 1-2 Planning Area ................................................................................................... 1-7 

Figure 2.1-1 Existing Land Use.........................................................................................2.1-3 

Figure 2.1-2 General Plan Land Use ..............................................................................2.1-21 

Figure 2.1-3 Specific Plan Projects in Inglewood.........................................................2.1-25 

Figure 2.1-4 Redevelopment Project Areas...................................................................2.1-27 

Figure 2.1-5 Existing Zoning...........................................................................................2.1-31 

Figure 2.2-1 Age of Housing Stock: Inglewood and Los Angeles County, 2000......2.2-3 

Figure 2.3-1 Population Trends: 1970-2005....................................................................2.3-3 

Figure 2.3-2 Race and Ethnicity: 2000 .............................................................................2.3-7 

Figure 2.3-3 Age Distributions in Inglewood and Los Angeles County.....................2.3-8 

Figure 2.3-4 AA Degree and Above in City of Inglewood, South Bay Cities, 

and L.A County: 2000 ................................................................................2.3-10 

Figure 2.3-5 Comparative Unemployment Rates: 2004 ..............................................2.3-12 

Figure 2.3-6 Average Annual Household Income: 1990–2000 (in constant 2006 

dollars) ..........................................................................................................2.3-14 

Figure 2.3-7 Projected Population and Employment Growth: Percent Change 

2000 to 2030 1 ...............................................................................................2.3-16 

Figure 2.3-8 City of Inglewood Comparative Employment Distribution by 

Sector: 1994 to 2004...................................................................................2.3-18 

Figure 2.3-9 City of Inglewood Service Sector Categories as Percent of Service 

Sector Employment: 2004 .........................................................................2.3-20 

Figure 2.3-10 City of Inglewood Average Annual Salary in 8 Largest 

Employment Sectors: 2004 (Constant 2005 Dollars)............................2.3-22 

Figure 2.3-11 City of Inglewood Average Annual Salary in Service Sector 

Industries: 2004 (Constant 2005 Dollars) ...............................................2.3-23 

iv 

City of Inglewood General Plan Update Technical Background Report

Contents 

Figure 2.3-12 City of Inglewood Distribution of Establishments by Sectors: 

2004 ..............................................................................................................2.3-25 

Figure 2.3-13 City of Inglewood Sectoral Concentration of Establishments by 

ZIP Codes: 2003.........................................................................................2.3-27 

Figure 2.3-14 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 (in ’000s 

Constant 2005 Dollars)..............................................................................2.3-30 

Figure 2.3-15 City of Inglewood and South Bay Cities Per Capita Taxable Retail 

Sales: 2004 (in Constant 2005 Dollars)....................................................2.3-32 

Figure 2.3-16 City of Inglewood Non-Residential Building Activity: 1994-2004 

(in thousands of constant 2006 dollars) ..................................................2.3-37 

Figure 2.3-17 City of Inglewood Residential Building Activity: 1995 to 2005...........2.3-39 

Figure 2.3-18 Comparative Median Contract Rent: 2000 and 2006 1 ...........................2.3-42 

Figure 3.1-1 Water Service Areas...................................................................................... 3.1-3 

Figure 3.2-1 Sewer Index ................................................................................................... 3.2-3 

Figure 3.3-1 Storm Drain Index ....................................................................................... 3.3-3 

Figure 3.8-1 Arterial Street Lanes..................................................................................... 3.8-5 

Figure 3.8-2 Metro Bus Routes within the City of Inglewood...................................3.8-11 

Figure 3.8-3 I-Line Shuttle Trolley.................................................................................3.8-13 

Figure 3.8-4 City of Inglewood Proposed Bicycle Routes..........................................3.8-17 

Figure 3.8-5 City of Inglewood Designated Truck Routes.........................................3.8-21 

Figure 4.1-1 School Locations .......................................................................................... 4.1-5 

Figure 4.2-1 Parks and Recreation Centers..................................................................... 4.2-3 

Figure 4.3-1 Library Locations.......................................................................................... 4.3-3 

Figure 5.1-1 Biological Resources..................................................................................... 5.1-5 

Figure 5.2-1 Watersheds..................................................................................................... 5.2-3 

Figure 5.3-1 Topography/Slope Analysis........................................................................ 5.3-3 

Figure 5.5-1 Historic Resources........................................................................................ 5.5-3 

Figure 5.6-1 Wind Rose ..................................................................................................... 5.6-3 

Figure 6.2-1 Geology and Fault Lines.............................................................................. 6.2-3 

Figure 6.5-1 Location of LUFT Sites............................................................................... 6.5-5 

Figure 6.6-1 Police Services............................................................................................... 6.6-3 

Figure 6.7-1 Fire Stations................................................................................................... 6.7-3 

Figure 6.9-1 Noise Monitoring Locations....................................................................... 6.9-5 

Figure 6.9-2 Existing Roadway Noise Contours..........................................................6.9-11 

Figure 6.9-3 Existing LAX Noise Contours .................................................................6.9-15 

• Tables 

Table 1-1 Elements of the General Plan........................................................................ 1-2 

Table 2.1-1 Existing Land Uses....................................................................................... 2.1-2 

Table 2.1-2 General Plan Land Use Designations......................................................2.1-20 

Table 2.1-3 Zoning Designations..................................................................................2.1-33 

Table 2.2-1 Housing Unit Growth, 1990, 2000, (2005 Estimates)............................. 2.2-1 

Table 2.2-2 Inglewood Housing Estimates, 2005......................................................... 2.2-2 


v

Contents 

Table 2.2-3 Housing Tenure, 1990–2000.......................................................................2.2-2 

Table 2.2-4 Inglewood Home Resale Activity, by Zip Code, 2005............................2.2-4 

Table 2.2-5 Inglewood Home Sale Activity, 2004/05..................................................2.2-4 

Table 2.2-6 Apartment Rental Rates...............................................................................2.2-5 

Table 2.2-7 Housing Affordability ..................................................................................2.2-6 

Table 2.2-8 Housing Problems by Tenure and Income...............................................2.2-7 

Table 2.2-9 Overcrowding................................................................................................2.2-8 

Table 2.2-30 RHNA Construction Need and Income Distribution, 1998-2005........2.2-9 

Table 2.2-41 Quantified Objectives ................................................................................2.2-10 

Table 2.2-52 Assisted Housing Developments, City of Inglewood ...........................2.2-13 

Table 2.3-1 Population Trends: 1990–2000 and 2000–2005.......................................2.3-4 

Table 2.3-2 Demographic Profile of Market Area: 2000 & 2005 ...............................2.3-5 

Table 2.3-3 Population by Race and Ethnicity: 2000 ...................................................2.3-6 

Table 2.3-4 Age Distribution: 1990 and 2000 ...............................................................2.3-6 

Table 2.3-5 Educational Attainment of Population 25 Years and Older: 2000........2.3-9 

Table 2.3-6 Labor Force: 2000.......................................................................................2.3-11 

Table 2.3-7 Comparative Unemployment Rates: 1994 and 2004 .............................2.3-12 

Table 2.3-8 Distribution of Income: 1990–2000 (in nominal dollars).....................2.3-13 

Table 2.3-9 Average Household Income .....................................................................2.3-14 

Table 2.3-10 Population, Households and Employment Projections: 2000 to 

2030 a ..............................................................................................................2.3-15 

Table 2.3-11 City of Inglewood Employment by Sector: 1994 to 2004 a ...................2.3-18 

Table 2.3-12 City of Inglewood Employment by Sector: 2001 to 2004 a ...................2.3-19 

Table 2.3-13 Number of Establishments, Employment, and Wages: 2001–2004 ...2.3-21 

Table 2.3-14 City of Inglewood Distribution of Establishments by Sectors: 

2001 to 2004 ................................................................................................2.3-24 

Table 2.3-15 City of Inglewood Distribution of Firms by ZIP Codes: 2003............2.3-26 

Table 2.3-16 City of Inglewood Locational Index of Sectors by ZIP Codes: 

2003...............................................................................................................2.3-27 

Table 2.3-17 City of Inglewood and Los Angeles County Comparative Sectoral 

Specialization by Employment Distribution: 2004................................2.3-28 

Table 2.3-18 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004........................2.3-29 

Table 2.3-19 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales by Retail Category: 1994 and 

2004...............................................................................................................2.3-31 

Table 2.3-20 South Bay Cities Taxable Retail Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 

(Constant 2005 Dollars).............................................................................2.3-33 

Table 2.3-21 City of Inglewood and County of Los Angeles Comparative Per 

Capita Taxable Sales: 2004 (Constant 2005 Dollars).............................2.3-34 

Table 2.3-22 City of Inglewood Retail Market Inventory, 2006 .................................2.3-35 

Table 2.3-23 City of Inglewood Retail Market Lease and Vacancy Rates: 2006 ......2.3-36 

Table 2.3-24 City of Inglewood Non-Residential Building Permit Valuations: 

1994–2004 (in thousands of constant 2006 dollars)..............................2.3-37 

Table 2.3-25 Inglewood New Residential Building Activity: 1994 to 2004 (in 

thousands of constant 2006 dollars) ........................................................2.3-38 

vi 


Contents 

Table 2.3-26 City of Inglewood, South Bay Cities, and Los Angeles County 

Single-Family Median Sales Price: February 2006..................................2.3-40 

Table 2.3-27 City of Inglewood, South Bay Cities, and Los Angeles County 

Median Value for Condominiums: February 2006................................2.3-41 

Table 2.3-28 City of Inglewood and South Bay Cities Transient Occupancy Tax 

Revenues: 2002–2003.................................................................................2.3-44 

Table 3.1-1 Current and projected Water Supplies (AF/YR)..................................... 3.1-8 

Table 3.1-2 Recycled Water Use...................................................................................... 3.1-9 

Table 3.4-1 Transfer Stations........................................................................................... 3.4-2 

Table 3.4-2 Overall Residential Waste Stream by Material Type................................ 3.4-4 

Table 3.4-3 Overall Commercial Waste Stream By Material Type............................. 3.4-5 

Table 3.4-4 Diversion Rate, City of Inglewood ............................................................ 3.4-6 

Table 3.8-1 Average Daily Traffic Volume, Lane Configuration and Daily 

Level of Service for Major Roadways Located in the City of 

Inglewood ...................................................................................................... 3.8-7 

Table 4.1-1 Public Schools Operated by the Inglewood Unified School 

District............................................................................................................ 4.1-2 

Table 4.1-2 Private Schools within Inglewood.............................................................. 4.1-4 

Table 4.1-3 Inglewood Unified School District Alternative Enrollment 

Projections Based on Adjusted Matriculation October 2005 

(CBEDs) K–12 Enrollments within District Boundaries.....................4.1-11 

Table 4.2-1 Parks ............................................................................................................... 4.2-5 

Table 5.3-1 Percent of City Land within Specified Slope Gradients ......................... 5.3-1 

Table 5.6-1 Summary of Ambient Air Quality Data .................................................... 5.6-9 

Table 5.6-2 2004 Estimated Annual Emissions Summary for Los Angeles 

County (tons/day) ......................................................................................5.6-10 

Table 5.6-3 Existing Carbon Monoxide Concentrations...........................................5.6-12 

Table 5.6-4 AQMP Control Strategies for Local Governments...............................5.6-18 

Table 6.2-1 Relationship between Greatest Measure Intensity and Magnitude ....... 6.2-5 

Table 6.5-1 Facilities on SLIC List for the City of Inglewood ................................... 6.5-4 

Table 6.6-1 Inglewood Police Department, Staffing Levels, 2006............................. 6.6-2 

Table 6.6-2 City of Inglewood, Crime Summary, 1999–2005..................................... 6.6-7 

Table 6.7-1 Inglewood Fire Stations............................................................................... 6.7-2 

Table 6.9-1 Representative Environmental Noise Levels ........................................... 6.9-2 

Table 6.9-2 Existing Daytime Noise Levels at Selected Locations a .......................... 6.9-7 

Table 6.9-3 Existing Roadway Noise Levels ................................................................. 6.9-8 

Table 6.9-4 Land Use/Noise Compatibility Guidelines ............................................6.9-17 

Table 6.9-5 Base Ambient Noise Levels ......................................................................6.9-18 

Table 6.9-6 Maximum Residential Noise Levels.........................................................6.9-19 


vii

CHAPTER 1 

Introduction 

1.1 BACKGROUND 

The current General Plan for the City of Inglewood contains seven elements, six of 

which were adopted in the 1980s and 1990s and have not since been updated. Although 

the General Plan has not been comprehensively revised until now, there have been 

periodic amendments to the Land Use and Housing Elements. The Housing Element was 

certified by the State Department of Community Development in 2005 in response to the 

State Regional Housing Needs Assessment requirements. Much of the data, analyses, and 

policies in these elements do not reflect the existing conditions in the City. Thus, a 

comprehensive update of the General Plan is necessary to reflect current conditions as 

well as the community’s vision for development within Inglewood over the next 20 years. 

1.2 GENERAL PLAN 

A General Plan is a state-required legal document that provides guidance to decision 

makers regarding the allocation of resources, and determining the future physical form 

and character of development for cities. It is the official statement of the jurisdiction 

regarding the extent and types of development needed to achieve the community’s 

physical, economic, social, and environmental goals. Although the General Plan consists 

of individual sections, or “elements,” that address a specific area of concern, it also 

embodies a comprehensive and integrated planning approach for the jurisdiction. 

The General Plan clarifies and articulates the City’s intentions with respect to the rights 

and expectations of the general public, property owners, special interest groups, 

prospective investors, and business interests. Through the General Plan, the City informs 

the community of its goals, policies, and development standards, thereby communicating 

the City’s expectations of the private sector in meeting the intentions of the General Plan. 

Under state law, each General Plan must contain seven elements: 

• Land Use 

• Circulation 

• Housing 

• Conservation 

• Open Space 

• Noise 

• Safety 

A list of current elements of the General Plan and when they were last revised is shown 

in the table below. It is anticipated that there may be a reorganization of the existing 

elements with the update of the General Plan; the specific elements proposed will be 

determined at a later date. 


1-1

Chapter 1 Introduction 

Table 1-1 

Elements of the General Plan 

Required Elements 

Current Elements 

Land Use Land Use (1980) 

Housing Housing (certified by HCD in 2005) 

Open Space Open Space (1995) 

Conservation Conservation (1997) 

Circulation Circulation (1992) 

Safety Safety (1995) 

Noise Noise (1987) 

1.3 TECHNICAL BACKGROUND REPORT 

• Purpose 

The purpose of this document, the City of Inglewood General Plan Technical 

Background Report (TBR), is to serve as a comprehensive database that describes the 

City’s existing conditions for physical, social, and economic resources. This information 

includes discussion of the existing characteristics, trends and forecasts, and issues 

associated with each resource. The planning issues, which were identified based on 

existing conditions, will be presented as a separate document. The TBR is the foundation 

document from which subsequent planning policies and programs will be formulated. In 

addition, the TBR will serve as the “Environmental Setting” section for each technical 

environmental issue analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report, which will be 

completed as a component of the preparation of the General Plan. 

• Contents 

This document consists of six chapters, as described below. 

• Chapter 1—Introduction: This chapter outlines the purpose and contents of this 

document, as well as defines the City’s boundaries, and provides the regional 

setting. 

• Chapter 2—Community Development: Chapter 2 includes exhibits identifying General 

Plan and zoning designations for the City. Existing land uses within the City, as 

well as existing specific and development plans, are also described. Lastly, it 

provides fiscal, population, demographic, and housing information. 

• Chapter 3—Infrastructure: This chapter provides information on existing 

infrastructure within the City. A section that describes the existing circulation 

system, as well as traffic volumes, capacities, and levels of service are included. 

Other infrastructure associated with water, wastewater, storm drain, solid waste, 

energy, and telecommunications are described. Specifically, existing utility 

providers, type and capacity of services, and location of infrastructure are 

discussed. 

• Chapter 4—Community Services: Information on community services that include 

schools, parks and recreation and library services are provided in this chapter. 

1-2 


Chapter 1 Introduction 

Existing school enrollment, as well as locations of facilities and planned 

improvements, are discussed. Facilities within the community that provide parks 

and recreational facilities, and library services are described. 

• Chapter 5—Environmental Resources. Chapter 5 provides information on 

environmental resources present in the City. These include primarily plants and 

animals. Existing surface and ground water resources and their quality are 

described. Air quality, topography, and visual resources are also discussed in this 

chapter. Lastly, historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources are included. 

• Chapter 6—Community Safety and Hazards. This chapter provides background 

information on public safety issues affecting the area. Hazards associated with 

geology, seismic, flooding, hazardous materials and fire are discussed, as well as 

public safety services such as police, fire and emergency preparedness. Lastly, 

existing noise conditions are described. 

• Chapter 7—Synthesis of Planning Issues: This Chapter presents a matrix of the issues 

identified in the preceding chapters of this TBR. The issues presented in this 

Chapter, represent opportunities, constraints, challenges, or problems facing the 

City of Inglewood as related to each of the topical areas to be covered in the 

General Plan update. 

1.4 REGIONAL SETTING 

Located in the Southern California region, Inglewood is located within southwestern Los 

Angeles County, southwest of downtown Los Angeles along the northern edge of a 

subarea commonly referred to as the South Bay. The proximity of Inglewood to the 

historic center of Los Angeles makes it one of the older and most urbanized of all the 

South Bay communities. Generally, Inglewood is bordered by the City of Hawthorne and 

the unincorporated Los Angeles County community of Lennox to the south, the City of 

Los Angeles to the east, the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), the City of El 

Segundo and unincorporated portions of Los Angeles County to the west. To the north, 

Inglewood is bordered by the unincorporated Los Angeles County communities of 

Ladera, Baldwin Hills, View Park and Windsor Hills as well as the City of Los Angeles. 

Regional access to the City is provided by several freeways. The Santa Monica (I-405) 

Freeway runs north to south, and bisects Inglewood near the community’s western 

border, while the Century (I-105) Freeway runs east to west near the City’s southern 

boundary. In addition, the State Route (SR) Harbor (110) Freeway transverses north to 

south, within close proximity to Inglewood on the east (Figure 1-1). 

1.5 GENERAL PLAN PLANNING AREA 

For the update of the General Plan and preparation of the TBR, the Planning Area will 

comprise the City limits of Inglewood, approximately 8.9 square miles and the City’s 

sphere of influence (SOI) area. (Figure 1-2). As referred to in this TBR, a sphere of 

influence is the probably ultimate physical boundary and service area of the City ,as 

determined by the Local Agency Formation Commission. The City’s SOI is located 

southwest of the city boundary located next to the unincorporated Los Angeles County 

community of Lennox. The total SOI area is approximately 334.7 acres. 


1-3

CITY of INGLEWOOD 

General Plan 

REGIONAL MAP 

Legend 

City of Inglewood Boundary 

Regional Park 

Los Angeles International Airport 

City or Unincorporated Area 

Los Angeles County Boundary 

Source: City of Inglewood, February 2006. 

Date: April 26, 2006 

A Division of 

Miles 

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 

Figure 1-1



PLANNING AREA 

Legend 

Sphere of Influence 

Planning Area 


Water Body 

Metro Rail 

Railroad 



Miles 

A Division of 0 0.25 0.5 

Figure 1-2

CHAPTER 2 

Community Development 

This Chapter describes the existing and projected land uses, population and 

demographics, housing, and economic conditions and trends within the City of 

Inglewood. This Chapter includes the following sections: 

• Land Use 

• Housing 

• Economic Conditions and Trends 

2.1 LAND USE 

This section presents information regarding existing and planned land uses in the City of 

Inglewood, and compares the existing land use to the current General Plan Land Use 

Map and Zoning Map. Information is derived from a field survey of the City, GIS data 

provided by the City, and review of pertinent City documents including the adopted 

General Plan and Zoning Code. A full list of resources is found under References at the 

end of this section. 

• Existing Conditions 

Existing Land Uses 

The City of Inglewood contains approximately 8.9 gross square miles and over 

5,800 acres of land area. The following discussion pertains to the existing land uses in the 

City, as shown in Figure 2.1-1. The land use data in this figure is based on data obtained 

by the City from the Los Angeles County Assessor’s office. Existing land uses fall under 

five general categories as follows: 

• Residential—1. Residential uses within the City include primarily single- and multifamily 

development. Other residential uses include mobile homes, elderly homes, 

and boarding houses. 

• Commercial—Includes uses that offer goods for retail sale to the public such as 

department stores, shopping centers, and supermarkets; and service uses such as 

restaurants, service stations, and beauty salons. Commercial land uses include 

businesses that serve local needs, such as restaurants, neighborhood markets and 

dry cleaners, and those that serve community or regional needs, such as auto 

dealers, furniture stores, hotels and motels. 

• Office—Includes professional and administrative office uses. 

• Industrial—Includes low- and high-intensity industrial and manufacturing uses (e.g. 

industrial, heavy industrial, light manufacturing, storage, warehouse, etc.). 

• Public Facilities—Includes civic and governmental buildings and institutional uses 

such as City Hall, the Courthouse, police and fire stations, libraries, churches, 

schools, hospitals, etc. 

• Other—Includes land uses which do not fall into one of the specific categories listed 

above. As identified in Figure 2.1-1, these uses include utilities, right-of-ways, 

parking lots, greenhouses, etc. 


2.1-1

Chapter 2 Community Development 

Existing land uses in the City are listed below in Table 2.1-1, including their acreage and 

percentage of total City acres. 

Table 2.1-1 

Existing Land Uses 

Land Use Acres Percent of City 

Residential 

Single-Family Detached 1 2,077.3 45.6% 

Duplex-Three Units 448.9 9.9% 

4+ Units 488.8 10.7% 

Mobile Home 7.8



EXISTING LAND USE 


Date: May 15, 2006 


Miles 

0 0.25 

0.5 

Figure 2.1-1

2.1 Land Use 

Duplex and Three-Unit Residential 

Land within Inglewood developed with duplexes and 3-units per lot totals 448.9 acres, 

accounting for 9.9 percent of the City’s total acreage, and 14.9 percent of all residential 

land uses. Neighborhoods consisting of duplexes and 3-unit lots are predominately 

located in the northeastern (Baldwin Hills vicinity) and southern portions of Inglewood, 

and are also scattered near the west-central portion of the City adjacent to the Santa 

Monica Freeway. The existing overall density for this residential category is approximately 

11.0 units per acre. These land uses serve as buffers or transition areas between the 

single-family areas and more intensive adjacent development. 

The general character of areas developed with duplexes or 3-unit lots differs depending 

on their location within the City. For example, within the northeastern and west-central 

areas of the community, more lots are developed with single-family dwellings than 

multiple-family dwellings. Consequently, these areas have sustained the qualities of a 

single-family neighborhood. These neighborhoods are relatively quiet, with older onestory 

homes interspersed with multi-family development, and adequate street parking. 

The areas south of Century Boulevard, however, are more densely developed, with a 

relatively higher proportion of multi-family development to single-family development, 

causing more congested street parking. Additionally, many homes in this area have bars 

on the windows, which indicate that safety is a concern within this area. 

Duplexes and Three-Unit Residential Areas 

West-Central area 


2.1-5


Northeastern area (Baldwin Hills area) 

Southeastern area 

Four or more units 

The City’s land area developed with four or more units per lot totals 488.8 acres, 

accounting for 10.7 percent of the City’s total land area and 16.2 percent of all residential 

land uses. These areas are found primarily surrounding the downtown business district 

and Civic Center near the west-central area of the City, and also along major arterials. 

Their locations provide access to the regional freeway network and close proximity to 

major shopping facilities in the downtown business district. 

The existing overall density for this land use category is approximately 25 units per acre. 

This land use helps buffer the lower intensity residential uses from the main commercial 

corridors and Civic Center. 

The character of these neighborhoods generally consists of high-density apartment 

complexes interspersed with occasional single-family, duplex, and 3-unit developments. 

2.1-6 


2.1 Land Use 

Residential Areas with Four or More Units 

Non-Residential Uses 

The following section presents the non-residential land uses in the City. These uses, 

which consist of commercial, office, industrial, public facilities, open space and 

recreation, and other non-categorized and undefined land uses, make up 33.6 percent of 

the City’s total land area. 

Commercial 

The existing commercial uses in the City total approximately 296.9 acres, accounting for 

6.5 percent of the City’s total land area. Commercial uses, as shown in Table 2.1-1, are 

divided into two categories: Commercial and hotel/motel. Commercial uses encompass 

all of the general retail and service uses in the City such as department stores, shopping 

centers, restaurants, and service shops; and comprise 271.2 acres, or 6.0 percent of the 

City’s total land area. Hotels and motels comprise 25.7 acres, which is less than 

one percent of City’s total acreage. 

Commercial land uses are found primarily along the major arterials in the City. The major 

north-south commercial arterials include portions of La Cienega Boulevard, La Brea 

Avenue, and Prairie Avenue; and the east-west arterials include portions of Centinela 

Avenue, Manchester Boulevard, Arbor Vitae Street, Century Boulevard, and Imperial 

Highway. Many of these corridors form important gateways into the City at major 

freeway access points, providing opportunities for high visibility and accessibility into 

Inglewood. These gateways include entrances into the City from the west at Century and 

Manchester Boulevards adjacent to the San Diego (I-405) Freeway; and from the south at 

Prairie Avenue and Crenshaw Boulevard adjacent to the Century (I-105) Freeway. 

While the City has made great strides in revitalizing its commercial corridors, there is still 

much to be done toward their improvement. The large extent of businesses on the City’s 

commercial arterials competes with and hinders the success of a viable downtown. The 

over-saturation of commercial corridors results in many underutilized businesses that are 

non-viable resulting in pour maintenance and visual blight. Many of those businesses are 


2.1-7


not well-maintained and do not provide adequate off-street parking due to their age (legal 

non-conformity) and inadequate lot sizes. The shallow lots and multiple small businesses 

lead to frequent curb cuts along the heavy arterials, congested street parking, and 

potential conflicts for both cars and pedestrians. Following is a more detailed assessment 

of the physical condition of the commercial portions of the City’s major commercial 

corridors. 

La Cienega Boulevard 

La Cienega Boulevard, between Florence 

Avenue and Century Boulevard, is within 

the City’s La Cienega Redevelopment 

Project Area. This area is generally 

characterized by major air cargo uses, 

including trucking, warehousing, air cargo 

logistics, freight forwarders, customs 

brokers, and packing firms. At North La 

Cienega Boulevard, at the intersection 

with Centinela Avenue, there is some 

obsolete development, with two vacant 

properties at the northeast and southeast 

corners. 

La Brea Avenue 

The entire length of La Brea Avenue is part of the City’s In-Town Redevelopment 

Project Area. This corridor is generally characterized by one-to-two-story strip 

commercial development, interspersed with various other land uses including private 

schools, chapels, auto shops and dealerships. North of Spruce Avenue, La Brea Avenue 

parallels Market Street and contains more attractive façades similar to Market Street, as 

shown in the photographs below. South of Spruce Avenue, the corridor is largely 

characterized by multiple vacancies, street-fronting surface parking lots, auto bays 

oriented towards the street, poorly maintained building façades and streetscapes, few 

street trees with the exception of the center median, lack of pedestrian amenities, and an 

overabundance of signage. Even the center median with its nicely-groomed trees reveals 

signs of aging by the deteriorating ground turf. 

2.1-8 


2.1 Land Use 


North of Spruce Avenue (downtown area) 

South of Spruce Avenue 

Downtown Market Street 

Market Street is also within the City’s In-Town Redevelopment Project Area. Market 

Street is an important component in the revitalization and redevelopment plans for 

downtown. It is the heart of Inglewood’s historic downtown shopping center, consisting 

primarily of retail uses with some office space and mixed-use retail-residential under 

construction north of Regent Street. This central business district is only three minutes 

away from regional entertainment and recreation facilities within Inglewood (Forum, 

Hollywood Park Racetrack and Casino), two miles from the LAX airport, and 12 miles 

from downtown Los Angeles. 

Currently the City is taking aggressive measures to revitalize the corridor, including 

investing $4.5 million in streetscape improvements including new landscaping, widened 

sidewalks, new street lighting, and wayfinding and branding signage. The Office of 

Economic and Business Development and the Redevelopment Agency created the 

Market Street Task Force to develop implementation plans for the revitalization of 

Market Street. The City’s Development Committee, the Planning Department, the Mayor, 

and the City Council will work together to develop a comprehensive Parking and 

Transportation plan as part of its General Plan update, to assist Market Street’s new and 

existing property owners to attract new retail and business tenants, and to introduce 

mixed-use housing developers to downtown. 


2.1-9


Most recently, façade improvements have begun at the north 100 block of Market Street, 

including new paint, awnings, signage, lighting, glass and some molding detailing. The 

south end of Market Street has also recently been revitalized, including a new bus center 

and newly remodeled retail space. 1 Also at the south end the City envisions expanding its 

Civic Center presence. 2 

Market Street—Downtown 

Prairie Avenue 

Prairie Avenue is located within three Redevelopment Project Areas, including the 

Manchester-Prairie, Century, and Imperial-Prairie. From Century Boulevard to Imperial 

Highway, the corridor is heavily dominated by service and retail uses, including many 

auto services, which create incompatibilities with retail uses and residential development 

along the corridor. Large portions of this area are developed with residential uses; and 

many properties are abandoned, underutilized, or vacant. Significant land uses in this 

stretch include a vibrant and active Mexican Mercado on the west side of Prairie Avenue 

at Lennox Boulevard. Except for the activity occurring at the Mexican Mercado, however, 

there is moderate pedestrian activity within this area. Between Florence Avenue and 

Century Boulevard, land uses on the east side of Prairie Avenue consist of the Inglewood 

Park Cemetery, The Forum, and the Hollywood Turf Club. On the west, land uses north 

of Manchester Boulevard are dominated by residential uses, and the Daniel Freeman 

Hospital and supporting services. South of Manchester Boulevard in this area, land uses 

are largely legal-nonconforming residential uses interspersed with commercial 

development. 

1 Inglewood, City of. Office of Economic & Business Development. Market Street. Website 

www.cityofinglewood.org. Updated 7/24/03 

2 Inglewood, City of. 2005. City of Inglewood Champions of Smart Growth and Development. A Great 

Place to Live, Shop, & Work. Spring. 

2.1-10 


2.1 Land Use 

Prairie Avenue 

Similar to Century Boulevard, the south entrance into the City on Prairie Avenue 

intersects with the Century (I-105) Freeway, which offers opportunities for a prominent 

gateway into the City from the south. Additionally, the large percentage of vacant, 

underutilized, and abandoned parcels present opportunities for redevelopment and 

revitalization of this corridor. 

Centinela Avenue 

Centinela Avenue is not within a Redevelopment Project Area. This corridor is generally 

characterized by a mix of land uses, including multi- and single-family residential uses, 

chapels, mortuaries, auto uses, and other office and commercial land uses. The major 

defining features of Centinela Avenue are the major retail/commercial shopping nodes at 

its intersection with La Brea and Beach Avenues. 

Centinela Avenue 


2.1-11


Manchester Boulevard 

Manchester Boulevard is located within several Redevelopment Project Areas, including 

La Cienega, In-Town, Manchester-Prairie, and Century. The commercial portions of this 

corridor are dominated by personal and business services. West of the San Diego (I-405) 

Freeway, Manchester is flanked by strip commercial development. Between the San 

Diego Freeway and Prairie Avenue, the corridor is made up of a variety of land uses, 

including largely strip commercial development. However, City Hall and Inglewood High 

School are also in this area, both important landmarks in the City. 

Between Van Ness Avenue and Crenshaw Boulevard (Morningside Park), Manchester 

Boulevard contains one of the few remaining Art Deco districts in the City. Several 

buildings feature Art Deco façades, which is an important resource that the City desires 

to protect. The Arcade Theater, Old Rexall Drug Building, and several smaller structures 

along Manchester Boulevard are consistently featured as good examples of Art Deco 

architecture in major publications on the subject. The City has bestowed this area with an 

Art Deco Design overlay to preserve and encourage this architecture, including the neon 

signage. The City also adopted Art Deco development standards in late 2002 for a 

significant area of Manchester Boulevard. 3 Due to the large number of service and retail 

uses, this corridor has a high level of pedestrian activity. 

Manchester Boulevard 

West of I-405 East of I-405 

3 City of Inglewood website, www.cityofinglewood.org, Office of Economic and Business Development, 

accessed March 14, 2006. 

2.1-12 


2.1 Land Use 

Art Deco Façades 

Arbor Vitae Street 

Arbor Vitae Street is also located within several Redevelopment Project Areas, including 

La Cienega, In-Town, and Manchester-Prairie. The entire corridor is dominated by stable 

residential uses interspersed with commercial uses. Additionally, the City’s second 

regional medical center, Centinela Hospital, and supporting services are on the south side 

of the street between La Brea and Prairie Avenues. There are also several public parking 

lots along the corridor which are nicely landscaped. Some incompatibilities exist along the 

corridor between the few industrial and residential uses to the west of the San Diego (I- 

405) Freeway. There is a high level of pedestrian activity at the west end of this corridor. 

Arbor Vitae Street 

Commercial-Residential Mix 

Public parking lot 

Century Boulevard 

Century Boulevard is located within several Redevelopment Project Areas, including La 

Cienega, In-Town, and Century. This corridor is strategically located in proximity to the 

LAX Airport just two miles west, has direct access to the San Diego (I-405) Freeway, and 

features the City’s largest regional retail and entertainment complexes, including 

Hollywood Park Marketplace, which includes Target, Home Depot, Staples, Walgreens, 

Bally’s, and Gigante grocery store; Costco, which has recently expanded and has sold a 


2.1-13


portion of its site for development of companion retail; and Hollywood Park Race Track 

and Casino. Additionally, “The Village at Century”, adjacent to Costco, was recently 

completed in 2006, and includes Michael’s, Bed, Bath, & Beyond, Marshall’s, Red 

Lobster, and Chili’s. The City is also in the exclusive negotiation stage for development of 

the proposed “Inglewood Promenade”, located along Century Boulevard across from 

Hollywood Park, and will include a state-of-the-art movie theater and mixed office and 

retail uses. 

While much improvement has occurred and continues to occur along Century Boulevard, 

much of the corridor, especially west of Prairie Avenue, suffers from many abandoned, 

underutilized, or vacant properties. The corridor experiences heavy traffic volumes, and is 

almost entirely devoid of greenery and open space, rendering it pedestrian unfriendly. An 

opportunity exists to create an important entry point into the City where Century 

Boulevard intersects with the 405 Freeway, with special emphasis on an airport-oriented 

identity. 

Century Boulevard 

Imperial Highway 

Imperial Highway is located within the Imperial-Prairie Redevelopment Project Area. 

Some of its assets include a Metro Green line station at the intersection of Imperial 

Highway and Hawthorne Boulevard; a neighborhood retail center at the northeast corner 

of the Imperial-Crenshaw intersection; and the Crenshaw-Imperial Village shopping 

center, currently undergoing comprehensive renovation, providing a mix of 

neighborhood-serving retail and office/commercial uses. Much of the corridor, however, 

is largely characterized by an obsolete mix of commercial and retail uses, with high 

vacancies and empty parking lots. The Crenshaw Boulevard street trees nearby to the 

north create a park like corridor, which could contribute to a potential viable gateway 

intersection with Imperial Highway into the City from the east. 

2.1-14 


2.1 Land Use 

Imperial Highway 

East of Crenshaw Boulevard 

Crenshaw Boulevard—north of Imperial Highway 

Office 

As shown in Table 2.1-1, office uses comprise 113.4 acres, or 2.5 percent of the City’s 

total acreage. Each of the three subcategories (stores/office, office building, and 

professional building) account for approximately 1.0 percent or less of the City’s total 

acreage. Office uses are generally interspersed with commercial uses along the major 

arterials discussed above. There are no large-scale office complexes in the City. 

Industrial 

Inglewood is located in a highly desirable industrial real estate market because of its 

location adjacent to the LAX airport, the San Diego (I-405) Freeway, and the Century (I- 

105) Freeway. As shown in Table 2.1-1, industrial uses comprise 191.7 acres, or 

4.2 percent of the City’s total acreage. Industrial uses are divided into three subcategories, 

including industrial, heavy-industrial, and light manufacturing uses. As shown in Figure 

2.1-1, the majority of industrial uses in the City are located west of the San Diego 

Freeway, and along Florence Avenue. 


2.1-15


Industrial Areas 

Public Facilities 

As shown in Table 2.1-1, public facilities include governmental and institutional uses such 

as the Civic Center, hospitals, churches, and schools. Together these land uses comprise 

562.5 acres, or 12.4 percent of the City’s total acreage. The Civic Center, which includes 

City Hall, the Police Station, main library, and Superior Court are found in the downtown 

area in the west-central portion of the City, while other public facilities are spread out 

around the City. 

Public and Semi Public Land Uses 

Inglewood Park Cemetery 

City Hall 

Parks 

As shown in Table 2.1-1, open space and recreational uses comprise 92.6 acres, or 

2.0 percent of the City’s total land area. This area includes primarily the City’s municipal 

parks, which are discussed in detail in Section 4.2 (Recreation and Parks) of this TBR. 

2.1-16 


2.1 Land Use 

Other 

Other land uses do not fit into a specific category but are still important to identify. These 

land uses, as described above, include utilities, right-of-ways, parking lots, clubs, 

greenhouses, and areas not defined by the Los Angeles County Assessors Office from 

which these land uses were obtained. Combined, these land uses comprise 253.9 acres, or 

5.6 percent of the City’s total acreage, and are found scattered throughout the City. 

• City of Inglewood General Plan 

This section presents information regarding the General Plan Land Use Designations that 

guide the proposed use and development of lands within Inglewood. It is derived from 

the Land Use Element of the Inglewood General Plan, which was adopted in January 

1980. The Land Use Element Map was subsequently amended in 1990, 1995, and 2005. 

The General Plan Land Use Designations are illustrated in Figure 2.1-2. 

A General Plan defines a jurisdiction’s policy for land use development within its 

boundaries. General Plan designations identify the proposed distribution, location, and 

extent of planned land uses. Designations provide guidelines for the maximum intensity 

and density of development, such as the number of dwelling units per acre and 

commercial building square footage. 

2005 General Plan Land Use Designations 

The City of Inglewood describes the allowable uses within its limits in its Land Use 

Element. The City’s 2005 Land Use Map illustrates the proposed use and development of 

all lands in six major categories: 

• Residential 

• Commercial 

• Industrial 

• Public/Semi-Public 

• Hospital-Medical/Residential 

• Open Space 

The residential and commercial land use categories are divided into subcategories. The 

uses described in these categories should be considered predominant, although different 

land uses may be present within each category. 

Residential 

The residential land use categories defined below reflect various housing product types in 

the City of Inglewood. In many cases, the descriptions in the classifications allow more 

than one product type in the area discussed. In those cases, the map illustration is not 

intended to limit future development to that product type, but is merely a depiction of 

anticipated development, given the density allowed in the area. The language in the Land 

Use Element text is the controlling factor in these instances. 


2.1-17


The residential land use categories are described below in a specific order that forms a 

hierarchy of residential land uses. Each residential category allows the uses contained in 

that description, as well as the allowed residential types described in the preceding 

category(ies). 

• Low Density Residential: 0–6 D.U./AC. This land use category has been applied to 

all single-family development, and is generally located in the eastern, southern, 

southwestern, and northwestern portions of the City. The density standards for this 

class provide for from one to six units to the acre. 

• Low-Medium Density Residential: 7–22 D.U./AC. This land use category has been 

applied to two main areas; the northeastern and southeastern portions of the City 

and represent major locations suitable for infill housing and conversion to 

townhouse complexes and garden apartments. These areas are presently developed 

primarily as single-family but they are well located with respect to convenience and 

access to the regional transportation network and serve as buffers or transition 

areas between more intensive development and areas of less intensive use. This 

category has a relatively flexible density standard of from seven to twenty-two 

dwelling units to the acre. 

• Medium Density Residential: 23–43 D.U./AC. This land use category has been 

applied to primarily those areas surrounding the downtown business district and 

Civic Center. Several of these areas are still developed with single-family densities 

but are generally in states of transition to more intense development. The locations 

provide ideal access to the regional freeway network and close-in convenience to 

the major shopping facilities of the downtown business district. The standards 

provide for relative large multiple dwelling complexes at a density of 23 to 43 

dwellings to the acre. 

Commercial 

Areas designated for commercial uses are divided into three categories, described below. 

Building intensity standards for commercial uses are already controlled by the City’s 

Zoning Ordinance and no additional regulations are proposed by the Land Use Element. 

• Commercial. This land use category basically represents all forms of commercial 

enterprise. This may include retail and service uses; corporate, medical, and other 

offices; restaurants; hotels and motels; and other commercial uses. Commercial 

areas are designated along the City’s major arterials, including the north-south 

arterials of La Cienega Boulevard, La Brea Avenue, Prairie Avenue, and Crenshaw 

Boulevard; and the east-west arterials of Centinela Avenue, Manchester Boulevard, 

Arbor-Vitae Street, Century Boulevard, and Imperial Highway. 

• Commercial/Residential. This land use category represents areas allowed for mixed 

commercial and residential. These areas are primarily concentrated around the 

Central Business District and Civic Center in the west-central portion of the City, 

in portions along Prairie Avenue and Imperial Highway, and in nodes at and 

around the intersections of Centinela Avenue and La Brea Avenue, and Manchester 

and Crenshaw Boulevards. 

2.1-18 


2.1 Land Use 

• Commercial/Recreation. This land use category is the area where both commercial 

and private recreation and similar uses would be allowed. This includes the area 

currently developed as the Hollywood Park Race Track & Casino and The Forum. 

Industrial 

This land use category has been applied to those areas that encompass both light and 

heavy industrial uses. The Element indicates that the distinction between light industrial 

or heavy industrial is not crucial in that virtually all new development would be located 

within industrial park areas and subject to review by the City. The City’s industrial areas 

take into account three factors involved in their location: infrastructure (transportation 

facilities and utilities), compatibility of use, and proximity to an adequate labor force. 

Industrial areas are designated primarily in the area west of the San Diego (I-405) 

Freeway, and in large portions along Florence Avenue and Century Boulevard. 

Public/Semi-Public 

This land use category has been applied to those areas used for civic purposes, including 

City Hall, the library, and the police station, and also includes other public institutions 

such as Inglewood High School and the Inglewood Park Cemetery. These areas are found 

primarily concentrated in the Civic Center area in the west-central portion of the City, 

and scattered as well in various locations throughout the City. 

Open Space 

This land use category distinguishes those lands and uses which are of such a nature that 

they should be reserved for open space and/or recreational activities. The largest 

concentration of open space in the City is Edward Vincent Jr. Park. Smaller areas include 

all of the other municipal parks throughout the City. 

Hospital-Medical/Residential 

This land use category is an outgrowth of a specialized land use situation. Inglewood has 

two regional medical centers which are a dominating influence on the surrounding land 

pattern. Both Daniel Freeman and Centinela Hospital have grown to the point where 

they have attracted adjacent satellite uses such as medical offices, convalescent and 

nursing homes, pharmacies and similar uses. The areas designated in Figure 2.1-2 are 

those areas which are within the vicinity of the respective hospitals and permit both 

hospital related uses and residential uses. 

Distribution of 2005 General Plan Land Use Designations 

The adopted General Plan land use designations for the City of Inglewood are shown in 

Table 2.1-2. Nearly 60 percent of the City’s total acres are designated for residential 

development. Among the residential categories, Low-Density residential makes up the 

majority of the City’s total acreage (30.5 percent), followed by almost equal proportions 

of Low/Medium-Density and Medium-Density residential, comprising 13.6 and 14.4 percent 


2.1-19


respectively. Commercial designated land uses make up the second largest category, 

comprising 22.8 percent of the City’s total land area. Among the commercial categories, 

Commercial uses make up the majority of land area, comprising 9.4 percent of the City’s 

total acreage, followed closely by Commercial/Residential uses at 7.7 percent. 

Table 2.1-2 

General Plan Land Use Designations 

Land Use Acres a Percent of City’s Total Acres 

Residential 3,382.9 58.6% 

Low Density 1,764.3 30.5% 

Low/Medium Density 787.4 13.6% 

Medium Density 831.3 14.4% 

Commercial 1,317.2 22.8% 

Commercial 542.6 9.4% 

Commercial/Residential 447.6 7.7% 

Commercial/Recreational 326.9 5.7% 

Industrial 495.9 8.6% 

Public/Semi-Public 369.8 6.4% 

Hospital-Medical/Residential 103.9 1.8% 

Open-Space 107.6 1.9% 

Total 5,777.2 100.0% 

SOURCE: City of Inglewood 2006 

a Acreage includes street right-of-way, and railroad right-of-way 

Presently, the City does not have a corresponding zone specifically for commercialresidential 

use; however, in 1982, the City amended the zoning code to allow 

development of residential uses as part of mixed-use residential/commercial development 

in the downtown C-1 zoned area. 4 

Comparison of Existing Land Uses and General Plan Designations 

Areas where the existing land uses differ from the General Plan are described below. Due 

to the difference in categories depicted in the existing land use data and the General Plan, 

only a general comparison can be made between the City’s General Plan designations and 

existing development. 

Residential 

Residential areas generally correspond with the General Plan, with minor exceptions and 

inconsistencies. Some parcels within the designated single-family residential areas are 

currently developed with higher-density residential land uses, and vice versa. Residential 

areas are also found encroaching into commercially- and industrially-designated areas. 

4 Inglewood, City of. 2005. Housing Element, Inglewood General Plan. December 6. 

2.1-20 




GENERAL PLAN LAND USE 




Miles 

0 0.25 

0.5 

Figure 2.1-2

2.1 Land Use 

Commercial 

Existing locations of commercial land uses generally correspond with the General Plan, 

however, along the major commercial arterials are also found many other land uses 

interspersed, including a large amount of residential, and some institutional and industrial 

uses. The General Plan also prescribes an increase in the depth of commercial area along 

the major arterials such as La Brea Avenue, Prairie Avenue, and Manchester Boulevard, 

that does not currently exist. An increase in lot size and depth encourages the provision 

of adequate off-street parking and the development of modern, more concentrated 

shopping nodes. 

Industrial 

Existing industrial areas generally correspond with the General Plan, except as follows: 

the General plan designates industrial uses along the south side of Century Boulevard, 

between approximately Inglewood Avenue and Club Drive, which currently exists as 

primarily commercial development. 

• Specific Plan Areas 

The City of Inglewood currently has two specific plan areas, the International Business 

Park, adopted in 1993, and the Village Specific Plan, adopted in 1998. These areas are 

identified in Figure 2.1-3 and described below. 

International Business Park Specific Plan 

The Inglewood International Business Park Specific Plan is located in the south-eastern 

portion of Inglewood and bounded by Prairie Avenue on the west, 102 nd Street on the 

north, Yukon Avenue on the east, and 104 th Street on the south. The Specific Plan 

establishes development standards for land use, urban design, circulation, site access, 

infrastructure requirements and the design character for the area and aims to fulfill the 

following objectives 5 : 

• The anticipated removal of area’s residential units that are impacted by noise 

attributable to the aircraft operations of Los Angeles International Airport, and the 

relocation of the residents 

• The provision of appropriately sized industrial designated parcels 

• The provision of vehicular and pedestrian circulation facilities, sanitation, sewer 

facilities, water, storm drain facilities, utilities and other adequately sized 

infrastructure that support the projected industrial park use 

• The provision of the uses in an aesthetically pleasing “campus like” setting 

5 Envicom Corporation, 1993. Inglewood International Business Park Specific Plan. 21 December. 


2.1-23


Village Specific Plan 

The Village, formerly known as Darby-Dixon, is located just east of the International 

Business Park Specific Plan, and is bounded by Club Drive on the west, Century 

Boulevard on the north, Crenshaw Boulevard on the east, and 104 th Street on the south. 

When the Specific Plan was adopted in 1998, the area was experiencing a high level of 

crime and blight, including impacts from high aircraft noise levels, physical deterioration, 

increased costs for property owners, and diminished quality of life for residents. The 

Specific Plan was prepared to aid in the economic and residential revitalization of the 

neighborhood by putting in place a vision, physical plan, development regulations, and 

implementation strategy. At the northern portion of the Specific Plan is the “Village at 

Century”, recently completed in 2006, consisting of major retail, restaurants, and other 

specialty shops including Michael’s, Bed, Bath, & Beyond, Marshall’s, Red Lobster, and 

Chili’s. The southern portion consists of the new and renovated residential areas which 

are buffered from the commercial areas by two areas of public open space in the middle 

of the Specific Plan Area. 6 

• Redevelopment Project Areas 

The Inglewood Redevelopment Agency was established in 1969 to revitalize blighted 

areas in the City that have been designated as Redevelopment Project Areas by the City 

Council. The overall goal of the Agency is to eliminate blight to promote new 

development and to enhance private sector investment within the Project Areas. The City 

currently has six Redevelopment Project Areas, as illustrated in Figure 2.1-4. Following is 

a list of current projects planned within some of the Project Areas, as of February, 2005. 7 

In-Town Project Area 

D-3 Development. This project includes a 37,000-square-foot Retail Center on a 2.8-acre site 

bounded by La Brea Avenue on the west, Regent Avenue on the south, Market Street on 

the east, and Florence Avenue on the north. The City is currently in the exclusive 

negotiation stage with the developer for this project. 

Century Project Area 

The Village at Century. This project is located on a 19-acre site bounded by Club Drive on 

the west, Century Boulevard on the north, Crenshaw Boulevard on the east, and 104 th 

Street on the south. The project was recently completed in 2006 by the Haagan 

Company. The Village consists of a 193,000-square-foot retail shopping center adjacent 

to the Costco Center, featuring major retail, restaurants, and other specialty shops 

including Ross, Marshall’s, Bed, Bath, & Beyond, Petco, Michael’s, Red Lobster, and 

6 Christopher A. Joseph & Associates, 2004. Addendum to the Village Specific Plan Environmental Impact 

Report fort the Village at Century Project. May. 

7 Inglewood, City of. 2005. Redevelopment Project Summaries. February. 

2.1-24 


W 64TH ST 

S LA CIENEGA BLVD 

S ASH AV 

N MARKET ST 

S MARKET ST 

S OSAGE AV 

CULLEN WY 

CLUB DR 



Ladera Heights 

Hills 

SPECIFIC PLAN 

PROJECTS IN INGLEWOOD 

L O S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y 

W 64TH ST 

W 64TH PL 

E FAIRVIEW BLVD 

N LA BREA AV 

AVIATION BLVD 

W OLIVE ST 

S ISIS AV 

S HINDRY AV 

City 

of 

Los Angeles 

S GLASGOW AV 

l 

W FAIRVIEW BLVD 

W ELLIS AV 

W HILLSDALE ST 

CENTINELA AV 

W HILL ST 

405 

W VICTOR AV 

W FLORENCE AV 

W REGENT ST 

W QUEEN ST 

W KELSO ST 

W HILLCREST BLVD 

W ELM AV 

W PLYMOUTH ST 

W VENICE WY 

W MANCHESTER BLVD 

W OLIVE ST 

W NECTARINE ST 

W LIME ST 

W SPRUCE AV 

W MAGNOLIA AV 

W BUCKTHORN ST 

W ARBOR VITAE ST 

S OAK ST 

S HOLLY ST 

W 96TH ST 

W 97TH ST 

W 98TH ST 

W 99TH ST 

W HYDE PARK BLVD 

N OAK ST 

S ROSEWOOD AV 

S EUCALYPTUS AV 

S TRURO AV 

N FIR AV 

S FIR AV 

W IVY AV 

S WALNUT ST 

S GREVILLEA AV 

S MAPLE AV 

S BURIN AV 

S LA BREA AV 

E BRETT ST 

E HILLSDALE ST 

E STEPNEY ST 

S HAWTHORNE BLVD 

E HARGRAVE ST 

HYDE PARK PL 

E HAZEL ST 

S ORCHARD DR 

E WARREN LN 

S LOCUST ST 

E SPRUCE AV 

S LARCH ST 

E TAMARACK AV 

S MYRTLE AV 

E FLORENCE AV 

E GRACE AV 

E REGENT ST 

E KELSO ST 

W 101ST ST 

N PARK AV 

N PRAIRIE AV 

E QUEEN ST 

E LA BREA DR 

E BUCKTHORN ST 

E ARBOR VITAE ST 

S FLOWER ST 

E AERICK ST 

MANCHESTER TER 

S OSAGE AV 

W 103RD ST 

S PRAIRIE AV 

E BRETT ST 

E HYDE PARK BLVD 

E 65TH ST 


E HARDY ST 

W CENTURY BLVD 

W 102ND ST 

W 104TH ST 

W 105TH ST 

W 106TH ST 

KAREEM CT 

E 66TH ST 

WEST BLVD 

REDONDO BLVD 

Hollywood 

Park 

Lake 

YUKON AV 

WEST BLVD 

W 74TH ST 

VICTORIA AV 

PINCAY DR 

LUTHER LN 

POETS LN 

W 79TH ST 

W 81ST ST 

W 82ND ST 

W 82ND PL 

W 83RD ST 

W 84TH PL 

VILLAGE 

SPECIFIC PLAN 

S 12TH AV 



Los Angeles 

11TH AV 

S 11TH AV 

S 10TH AV 

S 10TH AV 

S 8TH AV 

CRENSHAW BLVD 

W 76TH ST 

W 77TH ST 

W 78TH ST 

W 78TH PL 

W 79TH ST 

W 80TH ST 

W 81ST ST 

W 82ND ST 

W 84TH ST 

W 84TH PL 

W 85TH ST 

W 88TH ST 

W 90TH ST 

S 8TH AV 

S 6TH AV 

S 5TH AV 

S 5TH AV 

W 101ST ST 

W 104TH ST 

MAITLAND AV 

S 4TH AV 

S BYRD AV 

S 3RD AV 

S 2ND AV 

S VAN NESS AV 

S VAN NESS AV 

City of Los Angeles 

Legend 

City Boundary 

Water Body 

Lennox 

L O S 

A N G E L E S 

C O U N T Y 



Hawthorne 

INGLEWOOD 

INTERNATIONAL 

BUSINESS PARK 

SPECIFIC PLAN 

S PRAIRIE AV 

W 107TH ST 

W 108TH ST 

W 109TH ST 

W 110TH ST 

W 111TH ST 

W 111TH PL 

W 112TH ST 

W 113TH ST 

S DOTY AV 

W IMPERIAL HWY 

105 

W 116TH ST 

W 117TH ST 

W 118TH ST 

W 118TH PL 

S CHERRY AV 

S DEHN AV 

S LEMOLI AV 

S SIMMS AV 

W 108TH ST 

ATKINSON AV 

ARDATH AV 

WILKIE AV 

THOREAU ST 

W 111TH ST 

W 112TH ST 


S SPINNING AV 

W 115TH ST 

L O S 

A N G E L E S 

C O U N T Y 

Metro Rail 

Railroad 



Miles 


Figure 2.1-3



REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS 

Legend 

Century Project Area 

Imperial-Prairie Project Area 

In-Town Project Area 

La Cienega Project Area 

Manchester-Prairie Project Area 

North Inglewood Industrial Project Area 




Miles 


Figure 2.1-4

2.1 Land Use 

Chili’s. An estimated 1,334 construction jobs and 612 full-time jobs were to be created by 

this project. 

Inglewood Promenade. This project is located on a 10-acre site at 3700 W. Century 

Boulevard, and includes a 60,000-square-foot movie theater complex, 40,000-square-foot 

surgical center, and 100,000-square-foot medical office building. The City is currently in 

the exclusive negotiation stage with the developer Imperial Partners, LLC, for this 

project. 

La Cienega Project Area 

LA CycleSports. This project is located on a 2.7-acre site at 900–920 W. Olive Street, and 

includes a 66,000-square-foot motorcycle/all-terrain vehicle and watercraft vehicle 

dealership. The City is currently finalizing the Disposition and Development Agreement 

with the developer Larry Hart. 

Areas Susceptible to Change and Approved Projects 

The following areas are identified by the City as being susceptible to change due to 

development interest, or recently approved projects not yet constructed. 

• Hollywood Park Racetrack and Casino. The 68-year-old Hollywood Park is on a 240- 

acre parcel that the owner has decided is too expensive to continue maintaining as 

its current use as a racetrack. Currently the owner, Churchhill Downs, is in the 

process of interviewing developers with the ability to purchase the site. The future 

use of the property has not yet been decided. 8 

• Queen Street/Locust Street Senior Housing. This project, developed by the City’s 

Redevelopment Agency, is a senior housing project and senior citizen center at 

Locust Street and Queen Street. The architect, Kennard Design Group/WWCOT, 

is currently in the process of preparing the construction drawings. The estimated 

completion date is September of 2008. 

• Yukon Avenue and 118 th Place. This project includes nine single-family four-bedroom 

affordable homes, estimated for completion in 2006. 

• Beach Street Housing Project. This project is located at 716-720 Beach Street and 

includes four affordable detached town home condominiums. The estimated 

completion date is 2006. 

• Commercial-retail Shopping Center. This project is located on a 9-acre site within the 

Imperial-Prairie Project Area at the southwest corner of Crenshaw Boulevard and 

Imperial Highway. The owner of the site is beginning the entitlement process for 

development of a shopping center. 

8 Real Estate Quarterly, Los Angeles Business Journal, 2005. The Last Days of Hollywood Park, 25 April. 


2.1-29


• Regulatory Setting 

Zoning 

Zoning is an implementation tool that establishes districts of permitted and prohibited 

uses to control the physical development of land consistent with the General Plan. In 

addition to permitted uses, zoning may also establish development standards relating to 

issues such as intensity, setbacks, height, and parking. California law requires that zoning 

be brought into conformance with the General Plan within a reasonable time period. 

Projects submitted for review and approval are evaluated for consistency with both the 

General Plan and the City’s Zoning Code. For large-scale development applications, a 

Specific Plan may replace the underlying zoning. 

Zoning Classifications 

The City of Inglewood General Plan, Zoning Map, and Zoning Ordinance control the 

boundaries of the zones in the City as well as the zoning regulations that are in effect 

within each zone classification. In some cases the land use densities within the General 

Plan and Zoning Ordinance are slightly inconsistent. Zoning regulations identify land 

uses and activities that are allowed, prohibited, or are allowed only with a Conditional Use 

Permit or other discretionary permit. Inglewood has 24 zoning classifications within its 

boundaries as illustrated in Figure 2.1-5. The zoning classifications and their associated 

acreages are shown in Table 2.1-3. 

Design and Development Standards 

The City’s Design and Development Standards, adopted January 30, 1979, is a separate 

document that does not replace or supersede the Inglewood Zoning Ordinance, but 

contains required design standards and guidelines for site development. The City has 

established a design review process and design standards to accomplish the following: 

• To maximize freedom, creativity and innovation in the architecture, landscape 

design and graphics of each individual project within the framework of constraints 

imposed by the community’s need to control development for the health, safety 

and general welfare of its citizens 

• To promote a visually attractive, safe and well planned community through the use 

of sound design techniques 

• To protect citizens from unsafe or unsightly conditions 

• To minimize potential nuisances to the uses surrounding the new development 

• To preserve and maximize the image, character and visual quality which is making 

Inglewood an attractive place to live and work 

Inglewood Downtown District Main Street Project Area Historic Design 

Guidelines 

These historic design guidelines, adopted May 15, 2000, are a result of a historic resources 

survey of the Inglewood Downtown District/Main Street project area that began in 1998. 

The project area is bounded by La Brea Avenue to the west, Locust Street to the east, 

2.1-30 




EXISTING ZONING 




Miles 

0 0.25 

0.5 

Figure 2.1-5

2.1 Land Use 

Table 2.1-3 

Zoning Designations 

Zoning Acres Percentage 

Single-Family Residential 

R-1 Single-Family 1,082.8 24.0% 

R-1Z One-Family/Zero-Lot-Line 5.6 < 1% 

Subtotal 1,088.4 24.1% 

Multiple Family Residential 

R-1.5 Limited Two-Family 4.2 < 1% 

R-2 Limited Multiple Family 552.6 12.2% 

R-2A Limited Multiple Family 237.5 5.3% 

R-3 Multiple Family 685.3 15.2% 

R-4 Multiple Family 55.8 1.2% 

Subtotal 1,535.4 34.0% 

R-M Residential and Medical 80.4 1.2% 

Commercial 

C-1 Limited Commercial 62.4 1.4% 

C-2 General Commercial 229.6 5.1% 

C-2A Airport Commercial 115.7 2.6% 

C-3 Heavy Commercial 77.8 1.7% 

C-S Commercial Service 31.4


Florence Avenue to the north, and Hillcrest Boulevard to the south. Based on the 

preliminary results of the historic survey work and research, and the needs of the City of 

Inglewood and Main Street Inglewood with regard to the redevelopment of the project 

area, the scope of work was revised to include development of this Design Guidelines 

Manual. 9 

The design guidelines reflect the unique historic character of downtown Inglewood. The 

built environment of downtown reflects the City’s growth and development through the 

post-World War II period; and should be retained, enhanced, and emulated to ensure that 

Inglewood continues to convey its historic character. The Historic Design Guidelines is a 

comprehensive document that addresses the following: urban design; historic street 

patterns; urban scale; streetscape, landscape, and furniture; site elements; building scale, 

height, and setback; parking; lighting; building design; corner elements; entries; 

fenestration; texture, color, and materials; roofs and roofline features; building signs; 

storefronts; awnings; canopies; mechanical or utility screening; and security. 

• Issues 

• Single-family homes are being increasingly replaced by condominiums or 

apartments in multi-family-zoned areas, which has implications related to traffic, 

parking, school enrollment, etc. 

• The extensive area zoned for commercial along the arterial streets competes with 

the maintenance of a viable downtown. 

• Many businesses along the major arterials have not been maintained and cannot 

provide adequate off-street parking due to inadequate lot size. The shallow lots and 

multiple small businesses lead to frequent curb cuts, congested streets and a lack 

parking. 

• The City lacks signature development at major gateways into the City, such as 

Century and Manchester Boulevards from the west, and Prairie Avenue and 

Crenshaw Boulevard from the south. 

• Many commercial corridors lack the amenities (streetscape, bus shelters, trees, etc.) 

necessary to encourage walking. 

• References 

Christopher A. Joseph & Associates, 2004. Addendum to the Village Specific Plan 

Environmental Impact Report for the Village at Century Project. May. 

Envicom Corporation, 1993. Inglewood International Business Park Specific Plan. 21 December. 

Inglewood, City of. 1980. The Land Use Element of the Inglewood General Plan. January. 

———. 2000. 2000 Housing Element, Inglewood General Plan. 

9 Inglewood, City of. 2000. Inglewood Downtown District Main Street Project Area Historic Design 

Guidelines. May 15. 

2.1-34 


2.1 Land Use 

———. 2000. Inglewood Downtown District Main Street Project Area Historic Design Guidelines. 

May 15. 

———. 2003. Office of Economic and Business Development. Market Street. Website. 

www.cityofinglewood.com. 24 July. Accessed March 14, 2006. 

———. 2005. Champions of Smart Growth & Development. A Great Place to Live, Shop, & 

Work. Spring. 

———. 2005. Comprehensive General Plan 2005 Land Use Element Map. 

———. Zoning Code. 

Kosmont Partners, 2003. Inglewood Economic Development Opportunities Assessment Report 

Volume No. II. February. 

Real Estate Quarterly, Los Angeles Business Journal, 2005. The Last Days of Hollywood 

Park. 25 April. 

The Planning Center, 1998. City of Inglewood Village Specific Plan, December. 


2.1-35

2.2 Housing 

2.2 HOUSING 

This section provides a descriptive profile of Inglewood’s existing housing conditions. 

Inglewood housing data is compared to Los Angeles County and/or adjacent South Bay 

cites, where data is available. Information for this section is taken from a variety of 

sources including the City’s 2000–2005 Housing Element, the 2004–2007 Consolidated 

Plan, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Housing 

Needs Assessment (RHNA), California Department of Finance (DOF) demographic 

statistics, and the 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census. 


Housing Development and Dwelling Unit Types 

According to 1990 and 2000 Census data, the City of Inglewood has experienced a 

decrease in the community’s housing stock since 1990. Between 1990 and 2000, the total 

number of dwelling units in the City decreased by 65; from 38,713 to 38,648 units. 

According to 2005 California Department of Finance estimates, the number of housing 

units in the City was estimated to be 38,564. 

Between 2000 and 2005, an additional 84 units were lost. This indicates an average yearly 

decrease in the housing stock of almost ten units over a 15-year period. The total number 

of housing units in the City between 1990 and 2005 and the net change in units are 

shown in Table 2.2-1 below. 

Table 2.2-1 Housing Unit Growth, 1990, 2000, (2005 Estimates) 

Year Number of Housing Units Net Change in Housing Units 

1990 a 38,713 — 

2000 a 38,648 -65 

2005 b 38,564 -84 

SOURCE: 

a 1990 and 2000 Census 

b California Department of Finance 

Table 2.2-2 shows the number of units for each housing unit type. The majority of the 

housing stock is made up of multi-family housing. The City’s 2004-2007 Consolidated 

Plan reports that the breakdown of housing unit type has remained virtually the same 

since 1990, with the proportion of multi-family development with five or more units 

increasing slightly, with a corresponding decrease in single-family detached homes. This 

reflects the redistribution of lower density single-family homes to higher density multifamily 

developments. 


2.2-1


Table 2.2-2 Inglewood Housing Estimates, 2005 

Housing Unit Type Number of Units Percent of Total 

Single-Family Detached 13,958 36.2% 

Single-Family Attached 3,228 8.4% 

Duplex to Fourplex 4,720 12.2% 

Multi-Family 16,420 42.6% 

Mobile Home 238 >1.0% 

City Total 38,564 100.0% 

SOURCE: 2005 California Department of Finance. 

Housing Tenure and Vacancy 

In 2000, 36 percent of Inglewood residents were owners, while 64 percent were renters, 

as indicated in Table 2.2-3. Reflecting the minor changes in the composition of the 

housing stock, the tenure composition within Inglewood has remained relatively constant. 

In 1990, 36.3 percent of households were homeowners, while 63.7 percent were renters. 

The percentage of owner-households in Inglewood was lower in 2000 than the Los 

Angeles County average of approximately 48 percent. 

Table 2.2-3 Housing Tenure, 1990–2000 

1990 2000 

Tenure Number % Number % 

Total Occupied 36,102 93.3% 36,817 95.3% 

Owner Occupied 13,110 36.3% 13,396 36.0% 

Renter Occupied 22,992 63.7% 23,421 64.0% 

Owner Vacancy Rate 1.5% 1.5% 

Renter Vacancy Rate 7.1% 3.5% 

SOURCES: U.S. Census 1990, 2000 

The vacancy rate measures the overall housing availability in a community and is often a 

good indicator of how for-sale and rental housing units are meeting the current demand 

for housing. Vacancy rates of five percent for rental housing and two percent for 

ownership housing are generally considered healthy. A higher vacancy rate may indicate 

an excess supply of units, while a low vacancy rate may indicate that households are 

having difficulty in finding housing. Low vacancy rates tend to drive up the prices, 

leading to other problems such as housing cost burden and/or overcrowding. 

The 2000 Census indicates a homeowner vacancy rate of 1.5 percent and rental vacancy 

rate of 3.5 percent, a decline in vacant rental units since 1990, which was 7.2 percent. This 

declining vacancy rate is indicative of the competitive housing market in Southern 

California. 1 

1 City of Inglewood, 2000. Housing Element, Inglewood General Plan 

2.2-2 


2.2 Housing 

Age and Condition of Housing Stock 

Housing age is frequently used as an indicator of the type of housing condition. Most 

residential structures over 30 years of age will require minor repair and modernization 

improvements, while units over 50 years of age are more likely to require major 

rehabilitation such as roofing, plumbing, and electrical system repairs. A unit is generally 

deemed to have exceeded its useful life after 70 years of age. A notable exception is 

housing in the northeastern end of the City above Manchester Avenue. Despite the age of 

the structures, the original quality of construction and subsequent property maintenance 

has resulted in relatively little structural deterioration. 1 

The City of Inglewood has a relatively old housing stock compared with other South Bay 

communities, with 30 percent of all units built prior to 1950. Figure 2.2-1 compares the 

age of Inglewood’s housing stock with Los Angeles County. The relatively older age of 

housing stock indicates that a significant number of units are in need of major repairs. 

According to the Consolidated Plan, approximately 4,000 of the community’s housing 

units are identified as substandard in deteriorating or unsound conditions. A majority of 

these units are suitable for rehabilitation. The City’s Property Maintenance Division 

identified only 15 units as substandard and in need of replacement. 

Percent of Total Housing Stock 


County 

1990 to 

March 

2000 

1980 to 

1989 

1970 to 

1979 

1960 to 

1969 

Year Structure Built 

1950 to 

1959 

1940 to 

1949 

1939 or 

earlier 

Figure 2.2-1 Age of Housing Stock: Inglewood and Los Angeles County, 2000 

SOURCE: U.S. Census 2000 

A major constraint to maintaining adequate housing conditions in the City is its 

geographical proximity to LAX. Many homes are impacted by both direct and indirect 

effect of aircraft noise. The City continues to operate an Airport Noise Mitigation 

Program, whereby sound insulation is provided to some homes, while homes where 

insulation will not be effective are removed. 

1 City of Inglewood 2004-2007 Consolidated Plan. 


2.2-3


Housing Costs and Affordability 

As reported in the City’s Consolidated Plan, the median price of homes and 

condominiums in Inglewood was $232,000, as of May 2004. More recent home resale 

activity from Dataquick, in December 2005, reveals that for the five zip codes within 

Inglewood, the median sale price for a home has substantially increased in the City. 

As indicated in Table 2.2-4, the median home price for single-family homes ranged from 

$448,000 in zip code 90302 within northwestern Inglewood, to $505,000 in zip code 

90305 within the northeastern portion of the community. The price for condominium 

units was substantially lower, ranging from a median of $313,000 in zip code 90301 to 

$384,000 in zip code 90305. 

Table 2.2-4 Inglewood Home Resale Activity, by Zip Code, 2005 

Single Family Homes Condominiums SFR Only 

ZIP Code 

Sales of Single 

Family Homes 

Price Median 

SFR ($1,000) 

Price % Chg 

from Dec 04 

Sales Count 

Condos 

Price Median 

Condos ($1,000) 

Price % Chg 

from Dec 04 

Median Home 

Price/ Sq. Ft 

90301 13 $458 20.5% 12 $313 27.6% $430 

90302 14 $448 9.1% 7 $333 38.8% $444 

90303 11 $465 19.2% n/a n/a n/a $394 

90304 6 $469 44.2% n/a n/a n/a $376 

90305 15 $505 6.3% 12 $384 -1.0% $368 

SOURCE: DataQuick, Southern California Home Resale Activity, December 2005 

Overall, the average sales price among all of the homes sold in Inglewood during 2004 

and 2005 increased by 20 percent, from $325,000 in 2004, to $390,000 in 2005, as shown 

in Table 2.2-5. 

Table 2.2-5 Inglewood Home Sale Activity, 2004/05 

No. Sold Year 2005 Year 2004 % Change Yr-to-Yr 

Inglewood 905 $390,000 $325,000 20% 

SOURCE: DataQuick, California Home Sale Activity by City, 2005. 

Data on apartment rents in 2004 were compiled within Inglewood as part of the 

Consolidated Plan. Data was obtained from advertisements placed on the internet rental 

services, and is presented in Table 2.2-6. As shown, rents for one-bedroom units range 

from $675 to $900, while two-bedroom rents range from $950 to $1,750. Relatively few 

three-bedroom rentals are available in Inglewood, ranging from $1,225 to $1,450 per 

month. 

2.2-4 


2.2 Housing 

Table 2.2-6 

Apartment Rental Rates 

Unit Size 

Rental Range 

Studio $350–$500 

1 bedroom $675–$900 

2 bedroom $950–$1,750 

3 bedroom $1,225–$1,450 

SOURCES: www. apartments.com; Yahoo! Real Estate. Compiled by the City 

of Inglewood, 2004. 

Housing affordability can be calculated by comparing the maximum affordable payment 

of the income groups with the cost of housing. The maximum affordable payment is 

based on 30 percent of gross income spent on housing costs including taxes and utilities, 

while the income for each group is based on the percentage of the HUD MFI of $53,500 

for Los Angeles County in 2004. The median family income has since increased to 

$55,500 in 2005. 1 Table 2.2-7 illustrates the maximum affordable home and rental price 

for households in Inglewood. 

As the table shows, few housing opportunities within Inglewood exist for very low 

income households. Low-income households are able to afford many apartment units 

and some lower priced homes, while moderate income households can afford a majority 

of rental units and many low to moderate priced homes. However, a continuing obstacle 

to home purchase is the down payment required by most lending institutions, which may 

place home purchase out of reach for low and moderate income households. 2 This table 

was also based on 2004 home prices. As discussed above, prices have significantly 

increased in Inglewood and the region since 2004, causing the purchase of many homes 

to be out of reach for lower and moderate-income households. 

Housing Needs 

According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) standards, 

households with housing problems are those households that (1) occupy housing units 

with physical defects (lacking complete kitchen or bathroom); (2) live in overcrowded 

conditions (more than one person per room); or (3) pay more than 30 percent of gross 

income for housing costs, including utilities. 

Table 2.2-8 shows the prevalence of housing problems by the tenure and income of 

households in Inglewood. More than half of all households suffered from a housing 

problem, including 63 percent of renters and 42 percent of owners. Housing problems 

were most prevalent among lower income households, especially among renters. 

1 California Department of Housing and Community Development, 2005. State Income Limits for 2005. 

2 City of Inglewood Consolidated Plan 2004-2007 


2.2-5


Income Group 

Annual 

Income 

Table 2.2-7 

Income Levels Housing Costs Maximum Affordable Price 

Affordable 

Payment Utilities b 

Extremely Low (30% of MFI) 

One Person $12,500 $313 $50 $150 $20,302 $263 

Small Family a $16,050 $401 $80 $200 $21,881 $321 

Large Family a $19,300 $483 $100 $250 $23,911 $383 

Housing Affordability 

Taxes & 

Insurance d Home e Rental c Housing Available 

No housing available at this price range 

Very Low (50% of MFI) 

One Person $20,850 $521 $50 $150 $57,972 $471 Studios 

Small Family a $26,800 $670 $80 $200 $70,379 $590 

No adequately sized units 

Large Family a $32,150 $804 $100 $250 $81,883 $704 

Low (80% of MFI) 

One Person $33,300 $833 $50 $150 $114,140 $783 Small apartments 

Small Family a $42,850 $1,071 $80 $200 $142,787 $991 Small apartments and 1-bedroom condos 

Large Family a $51,400 $1,285 $100 $250 $168,728 $1,185 Most apartments and 1- and 2-bedroom condos 

Moderate (120% of MFI) 

One Person $46,250 $1,156 $50 $150 $172,563 $1,106 Most apartments and 1- and 2-bedroom condos 

Small Family a $59,500 $1,488 $80 $200 $217,903 $1,408 Most apartments and 1- and 2-bedroom condos, some 3-bedroom condos 

Large Family a $71,400 $1,785 $100 $250 $258,957 $1,685 

Most apartments and condos, and some small 1- and 2-bedroom homes 

(inadequately sized) 

SOURCE: Cotton Bridges & Associates (CBA), June 2004 

a Small Family=3 persons; Large Families=5 or more persons 

b Utility costs for renters assumed at $50/$100/$150 per month 

c Monthly affordable rent based on payments of no more than 30% of household income 

d Property taxes and insurance based on averages for the region with adjustments for size of homes 

e Calculation of affordable home sales prices based on a down payment of 10%, annual interest rate of 6.25%, 30-year mortgage, and monthly payment of gross household 

income 

2.2-6 


2.2 Housing 

Table 2.2-8 

Housing Problems by Tenure and Income 

Income Group (% of MFI) 

Housing Problem & Tenure 0-30% 31-50% 51-80% 81-95% 95%+ Total 

Households with any Problem 

Renters 84% 93% 75% 37% 23% 63% 

Owners 60% 65% 62% 63% 28% 42% 

Total 80% 87% 71% 45% 26% 55% 

Households with Cost Burden 

Renters 81% 82% 53% 18% 4% 48% 

Owners 58% 65% 60% 55% 23% 38% 

Total 77% 78% 55% 30% 15% 45% 

Households with Overcrowding 

Renters 30% 40% 34% 18% 17% 28% 

Owners 19% 30% 25% 26% 9% 16% 

Total 28% 38% 32% 21% 13% 24% 

SOURCE: SCAG Existing Need Statement, 1999. 

Housing Cost Burden 

As shown in Table 2.2-8, housing cost burden among renters is widespread. However, in areas 

east of Prairie Avenue and south of Century Boulevard, housing cost burden among renters 

seems to be more prevalent than in other areas. 14 

Overcrowding 

Overcrowding in residential units is defined as having more than 1.01 persons per room. 

Severe overcrowding is defined as having more than 1.51 persons per room. As shown in 

Table 2.2-8 above, approximately one-quarter of all households lived in overcrowded 

conditions in Inglewood, with 28 percent of the renters and 16 percent of the owners 

experiencing overcrowding. Renters earning less than 50 percent of the Los Angeles County 

Median Family Income (MFI) had the highest incidence of overcrowding, with 30 percent of 

the extremely low income (0–30 percent of MFI) renters and 40 percent of the low income 

(31–50 percent of MFI) renters living in overcrowded conditions. 

As shown in Table 2.2-9 below, both overcrowding and severe overcrowding increased 

significantly between 1990 and 2000 in both the City of Inglewood and Los Angeles County. 

There are two primary factors likely contributing to overcrowding in Inglewood 15 : 

1. An increase in the number of large families residing in units constructed for smallersized 

families. This is probably the primary cause and is being exacerbated by the 

continuing increase in the number of larger households. 

14 Inglewood, City of. Consolidated Plan 2004-2007. 

15 Inglewood, City of. 2005. 2000 Housing Element. December 6. 


2.2-7


2. An increase in the number of large families who are “doubling-up” caused by the lack 

of available, affordable housing units. “Doubling-up” refers to two (or more) families 

residing in a unit designed for a single family. 

Table 2.2-9 

Overcrowding 

1990 2000 Change % Change 


1.00 or less occupants per room 27,841 26,546 (1,295) -4.7% 

1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room 2,871 3,366 495 17.2% 

1.51 or more occupants per room 5,390 6,905 1,515 28.1% 

Total Units 36,102 36,817 715 2.0% 

Overcrowding Units % of Total 22.9% 27.9% 

Los Angeles County 

1.00 or less occupants per room 2,433,804 2,413,405 (20,399) -0.8% 

1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room 207,528 249,094 41,566 20.0% 


Total Units 2,989,552 3,133,774 144,222 4.8% 

Overcrowded Units % of Total 18.6% 23.0% 

SOURCES: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc., U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990 and 2000 

More than 1.0 occupants per room is defined as an overcrowded condition 

Based on the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Needs Statement 

(1999), the 2000 Housing Element reported an apparent correlation between Census tracts 

having higher populations of Hispanic residents (who have the highest populations-perhousehold) 

and Census tracts with the highest percentage of overcrowded units. The Hispanic 

population has increased substantially since 1990, and the incidence of overcrowding has had 

a corresponding increase. 

Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) 

Every five to seven years, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 

produces the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for southern California. The 

purpose of the RHNA is to evaluate current housing data and to forecast future housing 

needs for all the municipal and county jurisdictions in the area. The intent of RHNA is to 

balance the distribution of various income-level households among the jurisdictions and 

specifically to avoid the impact of certain communities with a disproportionately large share of 

low income households. The RHNA is not a mandate to construct the full number of housing 

units assigned to the City. 

The 1998–2005 RHNA allocation determined that Inglewood needs to provide a total of 852 

new housing units, as shown in Table 2.2-30. Of these units, 534 must be affordable to low, 

very low and moderate income households in order to satisfy the City’s share of regional 

housing needs. This would constitute almost 62 percent of future housing needs during this 

period. 

2.2-8 


2.2 Housing 

Table 2.2-30 RHNA Construction Need and Income Distribution, 1998-2005 

Construction Need 

Very Low Income 

Units 

Low Income 

Units 

Moderate 

Income Units 

Above Moderate 

Income Units Total 

Number of Dwelling Units Needed 

1998-2005 

221 141 172 317 852 

SOURCE: Draft 2000 Housing Element, City of Inglewood 

The City was very active in its objective to provide new construction, rehabilitation, and 

conservation of its housing stock over the 2000–2005 planning period. According to 

Table 2.2-41 below, the figures for new construction exceed the projection of RHNA for all 

income groups except the very-low income persons, which fall short by 73 units. The majority 

of units were constructed on in-fill sites. The rehabilitation figures shown are the total of the 

housing programs utilizing federal funds aimed at housing and neighborhood preservation. 

The Deferred Loan Program, Senior Emergency Grant Program, Code Enforcement Exterior 

Façade Improvement Program and Lead Base Paint Removal Programs are intended to 

improve the existing housing stock. The conservation figures utilize existing base line and 

portable voucher (2,718) and proposed (160) rental subsidy programs, the prospect of 

replacement and conservation housing programs under the Inglewood Residential Sound 

Insulation program (3,014 units), and actions to maintain the existing housing stock (735 

units). Certain actions that could have been considered in the planning period include zoning 

code revisions to the M1-L zoned area in the North Lockhaven neighborhood. 

Land Availability 

Inglewood is a fully developed and subdivided City virtually lacking any vacant land to 

accommodate new subdivisions, nor is there any abutting vacant land that the City could 

annex. All new residential development will likely occur on the few vacant lots scattered 

throughout existing residential neighborhoods or on underutilized residential properties. This 

latter situation will offer the greatest potential for new units and will usually occur in the City’s 

higher-density residential zone where, typically, an older single-family residence will be 

replaced with a multiple-unit apartment or condominium complex. 16 

16 Inglewood, City of. 2005. 2000 Housing Element.December 6. 


2.2-9


Table 2.2-41 

Quantified Objectives 

Income Category New Construction Rehabilitation Conservation 

Very Low-Income 

Low-Income 

Moderate-Income 

Above Moderate 

Income 

148 UNITS 

In-Fill Sites—106 

Vacant Sites—0 

Approved/Under Construction Sites— 

42 

529 UNITS 




305 

501 UNITS 




36 

272 UNITS 




13 

490 UNITS 

30 Units—INHS Deferred Loans 

30 Units—Community Housing Develop. Org. Rehab 

250 Units—Code Enforcement Exterior Paint Rehab 

50 Units—Code Enforcement façade improvements 

80 Units—Lead Based Paint Removal 

50 Units—Emergency Grant Improvement INHS 

467 UNITS 

55 Units—INHS Deferred Loans 

25 Units—INHS PRIDE Paint Program 

2 Units—CDBG/CHDO Disabled Housing 

250 Units—Code Enforcement exterior paint 

program 

50 Units—Code Enforcement façade improvement 


35 Units—Grant Improvement INHS 

22 UNITS 

2 Units—CDBG-CHDO disabled housing 


_________________ 

3,010 UNITS 

30 Units—CDBG Senior Housing 

300 Units—Senior/At Risk Housing 

1778 Units—Section 8 Vouchers 

1500 Units—RSI home sound 

insulation 

30 Units—Section 8 Home Acquisition 

Vouchers 

50 Units—INHS 1 st Time Homebuyers 

2,026 UNITS 

50 Units—CDBG Senior Housing 

125 Units—Senior/At Risk Housing 

1100 Units—Section 8 vouchers 

14 Units—Redevelopment/Replace 

1000 Units—RSI Sound insulation 

75 Units—INHS 1 st Time Homebuyers 

575 UNITS 

500 Units—RSI sound insulation 

75 Units—CDBG Senior/At Risk 

Housing 

__________________ 

Total Through 2005 1,450 Units 979 Units 5,611 Units 

SOURCE: 2000–2005 Housing Element, City of Inglewood 

2.2-10 


2.2 Housing 

The zoning classifications of land in Inglewood do not preclude developers from 

constructing additional housing units. Unlike many cities which are predominantly zoned 

for single-family dwellings and thereby exclude or limit multiple-unit structures, 

Inglewood’s R-1 (One-family) zoned properties constitute only about 42 percent of all 

residentially-zoned land. The remaining 58 percent will permit two or more dwelling units 

per lot, and the great majority of these properties have not yet been fully utilized to 

provide additional housing units. 

Affordable Housing Programs/Resources 

The City of Inglewood provides a variety of housing programs to encourage 

development, conservation and maintenance of affordable housing, funded through 

various local, state, federal and private sources. Following is a brief description of some 

of the most significant housing funding sources used in Inglewood: 

• Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). The CDBG program is funded 

by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Project 

priorities include maintaining and upgrading the existing housing stock in the City 

through housing rehabilitation loans and grant programs; increasing the supply of 

affordable housing through new construction, first time homebuyers assistance, 

and Section 8 rental assistance. Other activities include developing housing 

opportunities for special needs populations, particularly seniors and the disabled; 

and providing emergency housing assistance for homeless individuals and families 

through a shelter and voucher program, case management, employment services 

and transitional housing leading to permanent housing. 

• Housing Division of Inglewood. This Division receives funds from the federal 

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to provide Section 8 

rental assistance to low-income individuals and families. The Housing Division 

administers a range of programs and services that are aimed at increasing housing 

stability, livability and tenant/landlord responsibility. The Housing Resource Center 

is located within the Division and helps tenant and owner organizations increase 

their effectiveness in working with tenants, landlords, government officials, 

prospective buyers and sellers. The Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Program is also 

managed by this Division, and provides early-intervention, self-sufficiency, and 

crisis-intervention for families that are threatened by homelessness. 

• Redevelopment Set-Aside Funds. The Redevelopment Agency is instrumental in 

the construction, maintenance, preservation, and conservation of housing in the 

City of Inglewood. California state law requires the Agency to set aside 20 percent 

of tax increment revenue generated from redevelopment projects to support 

activities that increase, improve, or preserve the supply of affordable housing. 

During fiscal years 2000 through 2004, the Redevelopment Agency rehabilitated 

and constructed 114 units using Redevelopment Agency Set-Aside Funds. The 

Agency also participated in negotiating construction of low to moderate-income 

units required to allow an amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for a project at 

3500 West 90 th Street. The objective during the fiscal year 2005 was to assist an 

additional ten households. 


2.2-11


• HOME Housing Rehabilitation. The first objective of this program is to improve 

the quality of housing for very low- to moderate-income households in residential 

neighborhoods by providing deferred loans, grants and free home exterior paint to 

homeowners for housing rehabilitation. The second objective is to implement a 

federal mandate requiring lead hazard assessment and abatement on all units built 

before 1978 that receive HUD funds for housing rehabilitation. 

• First Time Homebuyer Program. This program combines HOME 80 percent 

funding with 20 percent Redevelopment Agency Housing Set-Aside funding. The 

program objective is to increase the supply of affordable housing available in the 

community by providing down payment assistance to low- and moderate-income 

first time homebuyers. The City intends to expand this program to create and fund 

an on-going rental rehabilitation program that provides low-interest loans and 

grants to very-low and low-income renters to make repairs to residential units. 

• Inglewood Neighborhood Housing Services (INHS). INHS contracts with the 

Inglewood Redevelopment Agency to administer the First-Time Homebuyer 

Program, and preserve and expand affordable housing through refurbishing 

existing housing and developing new housing. 

• Community Housing and Development Organization (CHDO). This program 

guarantees an increase in the supply of affordable housing available in the 

community for very-low and low-income residents by encouraging development, 

sponsorship or ownership of affordable housing by designated CHDOs. The City 

is required to reserve 15 percent of the annual HOME allocation for investment in 

housing to be developed, sponsored or owned by CHDOs. 

• Residential Sound Insulation Program. This program is funded through the Federal 

Aviation Administration. It provides sound insulation for residences located 

underneath the flight approach to Los Angeles World Airport that has a minimum 

noise level of 65 decibels. 

• Housing Rehabilitation/Home Improvement Programs. These programs are 

provided to correct code violations and alleviate any health and safety problems in 

the home. Financial assistance is provided in the form of deferred loans and grants 

to eligible homeowners. 

• Emergency Shelter Grant Program. This program provides temporary and 

transitional shelter, food, case management, referral services and employment 

services to individuals and families without housing. The City has selected St. 

Margaret’s Center and People Assisting the Homeless (PATH) to provide 

emergency shelter services during the 2000–2005 period. PATH is a communitybased 

non-profit housing and homeless assistance provider, which was designated 

by the City in 2002 as a community housing development organization. 

Public and Assisted Housing 

The Section 8 Rental Assistance Program is administered by the Inglewood Housing 

Division, and is a federally-funded program available to low-income persons and families 

that meet HUD eligibility criteria. The program provides rent subsidies, on behalf of the 

low and moderate-income tenants, to the owners and developers of private rental housing 

within Inglewood. The assistance is in the form of a certificate or voucher which is issued 

2.2-12 


2.2 Housing 

to an eligible household. As of January 1, 2003, there were 2,718 housing units. Among 

the vouchers issued, over 91 percent were given to households headed by a female. In 

March 1998, 93 percent of the units were occupied; the City reported 100 percent 

occupancy for years 2000 through 2003. 

Table 2.2-52 below is an inventory of assisted housing developments within the City. As 

shown in the table, the City of Inglewood has exceeded its regional housing need 

allocation for lower-income households overall, and has successfully facilitated 

development of a variety of housing types for all segments of the community, including 

lower-income households and special needs groups. 17 However, as discussed above, the 

City still lacks the required number of units for very-low-income persons, which have a 

need for 221 new units and are currently provided 148 units. Additional housing projects 

are underway in the City, including the Locust Senior Center/Senior Housing 

development, which proposes approximately 20,000 to 30,000 square feet of senior 

center space and 60 units of senior housing. 

Table 2.2-52 Assisted Housing Developments, City of Inglewood 

Property Name Number of Units Assisted Units 

Eucalyptus Park 93 93 

Good Shepherd I 40 39 

Homeward Bound-Inglewood 4 4 

Inglewood Meadows 199 199 

Market Park Apartments 50 50 

Pacific Rim Apartments 40 39 

Regency Towers 104 104 

Regent Plaza 106 106 

Crippled Children Home 40 39 

Good Shepherd II 30 29 

Kelso Street 18 17 

924 Osage Avenue/Senior Housing 91 91 

733 South Hindry Avenue/Veteran’s Housing Project 301 301 

Total 1,116 1,111 

SOURCE: 

Housing Element, Inglewood General Plan 

• Issues 

• The City is experiencing a decrease in the single-family housing stock due, in part, 

to the demolition of older single-family homes in multi-family zones replaced by 

apartment or condominium development. 

• The low percentage of home owners is an issue. Only 36 percent of Inglewood 

residents were owners in 2000, compared to 48 percent for the County. 

17 City of Inglewood Consolidated Plan 2004-2007. Adopted July 13, 2004. 


2.2-13


• Housing availability in Inglewood is an issue. The vacancy rate for rental units 

declined dramatically over the last decade, from 7.1 percent in 1990 to 3.5 percent 

in 2000. 

• Inglewood’s housing stock is relatively old, compared to other South Bay 

communities. This represents a potential problem since a large number of the units 

are approaching the latter stages of their physical life span, which is generally 

associated with a more rapid rate of structural deterioration. 

• Many homes are impacted by both direct and indirect effect of aircraft noise from 

LAX, which creates a major constraint to maintaining adequate housing conditions 

in the City. 

• Home prices have significantly increased in Inglewood and the region since 2004, 

causing the purchase of many homes to be out of reach for a large portion of the 

City’s residents. 

• Overcrowding in the City increased substantially between 1990 and 2000, reflecting 

an increase in population growth without a relative increase in the number of 

housing units to meet this need. Additionally, overcrowding indicates that there 

may be a lack of housing that is suitable or affordable. 


Inglewood, City of. 2004. Consolidated Plan 2004-2007, August 15. 

Inglewood, City of. 2005. 2000-2005 Housing Element. December 6. 

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 1999. Existing Need 

Statement. 

———. 2004. Regional Transportation Plan Update. 

DataQuick. 2005. Southern California Home Sale Activity. L.A. Times Sunday Edition 

Charts. Home Sales Recorded in the Year 2005. December. 

———. Data for the Year 2005. 

U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Census Bureau. 1990. United States Census 1990. 

———. 2000. United States Census 2000. 

California Department of Finance. 2005. E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates, 

with Annual percent Change, January 1, 2004 and 2005, May. 

———. Historical Census Populations of California, State, Counties, Cities, Places, and Towns 

1850–2000. 

California Department of Housing and Community Development, 2005. State Income 

Limits for 2005. 

Yahoo! Real Estate, 2004. www.apartments.com 

2.2-14 


2.3 Economic Trends and Conditions 

2.3 ECONOMIC TRENDS AND CONDITIONS 

The purpose of this section is to provide an understanding of the existing demographic 

and economic conditions and trends in the City of Inglewood and the larger growth 

dynamics of the surrounding area. This section includes baseline data and trends related 

to population, employment, taxable sales and residential and non-residential market 

conditions. This section was prepared from a report by Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, 

Inc., which is much more extensive. The full report is found in Appendix A. 

The findings of this section will provide the framework for preparing economic goals and 

policies and facilitate discussion of existing and future economic development efforts. 

These goals and policies will be developed within the context of the General Plan to 

ensure that the City is able to maintain a strong economic base and take advantage of 

future employment opportunities. A strong economy not only provides the local workers 

with adequate income to afford a high quality of life, but it also provides local 

government with adequate public revenues to maintain a high quality of public services. 

The goal is to identify target economic opportunities that are both realistic and 

compatible with the City’s General Plan vision. In this context, the growth of the City’s 

economic base will depend on the identification of key industries that can be attracted to 

the City and support a diversified economy. Job types, salary and skill levels, income, land 

availability and location, and housing affordability are also important attributes of the 

economy. 


Regional Setting 

Inglewood is centrally located within the Los Angeles Basin. The City of Inglewood is the 

northernmost City in the South Bay region of Los Angeles County. This region includes 

the cities of Inglewood, El Segundo, Hawthorne, Gardena, Lawndale, Manhattan Beach, 

Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach, Torrance, Carson, Palos Verdes Estates, Lomita, 

Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, and Rancho Palos Verdes. The South Bay also 

includes portions of the City of Los Angeles along the Harbor Freeway and 

unincorporated parts of Los Angeles County. Inglewood is bordered by the City of Los 

Angeles to the north and east, Hawthorne to the south, and LAX to the west. The City is 

adjacent to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) and also about 15 miles from the 

Los Angeles/Long Beach Port Complex. 

Two freeways directly serve Inglewood. The Century (105) Freeway runs from Norwalk 

to LAX and is accessible in the southern part of the City. The San Diego (405) Freeway 

runs from southern Orange County through the San Fernando Valley and is accessible in 

the western part of the City. In addition to direct freeway access, Inglewood is in close 

proximity to the Harbor (110) Freeway, which runs from Pasadena through Downtown 

Los Angeles to the Port of Los Angeles and the Santa Monica (10) Freeway, which runs 


2.3-1


east from the ocean in Santa Monica through Downtown Los Angeles to the Inland 

Empire. A regional vicinity map is presented in Figure 1-1 of Chapter 1 (Introduction) of 

this TBR 

Community Overview 

Following is a descriptive profile of demographic characteristics and trends for the City 

of Inglewood. This includes population, households, household income, and 

employment. In addition, key demographics for the South Bay communities, including 

population, households and income are discussed. 

Population 

Population Growth from 1970 to 2005 

• Figure 2.3-1 illustrates the population growth trends for the City of Inglewood 

from 1970 to 2005; in this period of time, the average annualized growth rate was 

0.78 percent. 

• As shown, modest growth occurred in the period from 1970 to 1980; this increase 

from 89,985 in 1970 to 94,162 in 1980 represents an increase in the population of 

4,177, which amounts to an average annualized growth rate of 0.46 percent. 

• As shown, the most rapid rate of growth occurred in the 1980’s when the 

population jumped from 94,162 in 1980 to 109,602 in 1990. This increase of over 

15,000 represents more than a 15 percent increase in the total population and 

amounts to an average annualized growth rate of 1.53 percent. 

• As shown, population growth leveled off considerably in the 1990’s. In this ten year 

period, the population increased from 109,602 in 1990 to 112,580 in 2000; this 

amounts to an average annualized growth rate of only 0.29 percent. 

• In the five-year period from 2000 to 2005, Inglewood’s population has increased 

significantly. As shown, the population increased from 112,580 in 2000 to 118,164 

in 2005, a net increase of 5,584. This amounts to an average annualized growth rate 

of 0.97 percent. 

• Only about 13.4 percent of the housing stock in the City was built from 1980 to 

2000. In comparison, 19.2 percent of the housing stock in the County was built 

during this period. 

2.3-2 



120,000 

118,164 

115,000 

110,000 

109,602 

110,900 

112,580 

105,000 

103,500 

100,000 

95,000 

89,900 

94,162 

90,000 

89,985 

85,000 

80,000 

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 

Figure 2.3-1 Population Trends: 1970-2005 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc., U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990 and 2000. 

Population Growth from 2000 to 2005 in Inglewood and the South Bay Cities 

• Table 2.3-1 presents the populations for the City of Inglewood and select South 

Bay Cities in 1990, 2000, and from 2001 to 2005. The 1990 and 2000 data come 

from the decennial census while the 2005 data is provided by the California State 

Department of Finance. 

• Though the population of the City of Inglewood went up only slightly in the period 

from 1990 to 2000 (2.7 percent), within the five year period from 2000 to 2005, the 

City of Inglewood’s population increased by 5.0 percent. Compared to other South 

Bay communities, however, Inglewood’s population growth has been quite modest. 

• The City of Inglewood’s average annual growth rate was also lower than the 

average of the South Bay Cities, 0.27 percent as compared to 0.63 percent in the 

period from 1990 to 2000 and 0.97 as compared to 1.27 in the period from 2000 to 

2005. 


2.3-3


Table 2.3-1 Population Trends: 1990–2000 and 2000–2005 

Annualized 

Growth Rate 

1990-2000 

Annualized 

Growth Rate 

2000-2005 

1990 2000 2005 

Inglewood 112,602 112,580 118,164 0.27% 0.97% 

Carson 83,995 89,730 98,329 0.66% 1.85% 

El Segundo 15,223 16,033 17,024 0.52% 1.21% 

Gardena 49,847 57,746 61,072 1.48% 1.13% 

Hawthorne 71,349 84,112 88,790 1.66% 1.09% 

Hermosa Beach 18,219 18,566 19,608 0.19% 1.10% 

Lawndale 27,331 31,711 33,458 1.50% 1.08% 

Lomita 19,382 20,046 21,153 0.34% 1.08% 

Manhattan Beach 32,063 33,852 36,843 0.54% 1.71% 

Palos Verdes Estates 13,512 13,340 14,208 -0.13% 1.27% 

Rancho Palos Verdes 41,659 41,145 43,525 -0.12% 1.13% 

Redondo Beach 60,167 63,261 67,325 0.50% 1.25% 

Rolling Hills 1,871 1,871 1,983 0.00% 1.17% 

Rolling Hills Estates 7,789 7,676 8,191 -0.15% 1.31% 

Torrance 133,107 137,946 147,405 0.36% 1.31% 

Total South Bay Cities 685,116 729,615 777,078 0.63% 1.27% 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 

U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990 and 2000 

California Department of Finance 

Households 

The following presents the most recent population and demographic estimates for the 

City of Inglewood, the South Bay, and Los Angeles County. 

• Table 2.3-2 presents the most recent demographic information available as 

provided by the California State Department of Finance. As shown, as of January 1, 

2005, The City of Inglewood had an estimated population of 118,164. The South 

Bay Cities had an estimated population of 777,078. 

• The City of Inglewood is the second largest incorporated city in the South Bay, 

representing about 15 percent of the South Bay’s population. 

• As shown, Inglewood has an average household size of 3.22 persons per 

household. This is larger than the other South Bay Cities communities with the 

exceptions of Carson and Lawndale, which have average persons per households of 

3.83 and 3.49, respectively. 

• Inglewood’s Persons per Household average has increased from 2.91 in 2000 to 

3.22 in 2005. Similar increases in average household size have occurred in both the 

South Bay Cities and Los Angeles County. 

2.3-4 



Table 2.3-2 Demographic Profile of Market Area: 2000 & 2005 

2000 2005 

Population Occupied Units 

Persons per 

Household Population Occupied Units 

Persons per 

Household 

Inglewood 112,580 38,648 2.91 118,164 36,724 3.22 

Carson 89,730 25,337 3.54 98,329 25,667 3.83 

El Segundo 16,033 9,261 2.21 17,024 7,124 2.39 

Gardena 57,746 21,041 2.74 61,072 20,437 2.99 

Hawthorne 84,112 29,629 2.84 88,790 28,630 3.10 

Hermosa Beach 18,566 9,840 1.89 19,608 9,510 2.06 

Lawndale 31,711 9,869 3.21 33458 9,580 3.49 

Lomita 20,046 8,295 2.42 21,153 8,038 2.63 

Manhattan Beach 33,852 15,034 2.25 36,843 14,975 2.46 

Palos Verdes Estates 13,340 5,202 2.56 14,208 5,054 2.81 

Rancho Palos Verdes 41,145 15,709 2.62 43525 15,344 2.84 

Redondo Beach 63,261 29,543 2.14 67,325 28,889 2.33 

Rolling Hills 1,871 682 2.74 1,983 650 3.05 

Rolling Hills Estates 7,676 2,880 2.67 8,191 2,847 2.88 

Torrance 137,946 55,967 2.46 147,405 55,407 2.66 

Total South Bay Cities 729,615 274,937 2.65 777,078 268,876 2.89 

Los Angeles County 9,519,330 3,270,906 2.91 10,226,506 3,201,352 3.19 


California State Department of Finance, January 1, 2005 

Race and Ethnicity 

• As shown in Table 2.3-3 and Figure 2.3-2, the City’s racial composition is markedly 

different from that of Los Angeles County as whole. In 2000, the non-Hispanic 

White population comprised only 4.1 percent of Inglewood’s population, compared 

with 31.1 percent in the County. 

• In addition, the Black population in Inglewood is much greater than that of the 

County; 46.4 percent of Inglewood’s population is Black as compared to just 

9.5 percent of the County as a whole. 

• Also, while Asians makeup 11.8 percent of the County’s population, they makeup 

just 1.1 percent of the City of Inglewood’s population. 

• Persons of Hispanic origin are relatively equally represented in both the City and 

County. The City of Inglewood’s population is 46.0 percent Hispanic while Los 

Angeles County is 44.6 percent Hispanic. 


2.3-5


Table 2.3-3 Population by Race and Ethnicity: 2000 

Race Inglewood % of Total Los Angeles County % of Total 

Non-Hispanic White 4,628 4.1% 2,959,614 31.1% 

Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 51,829 46.0% 4,242,213 44.6% 

African American 52,260 46.4% 901,472 9.5% 

Asian 1,217 1.1% 1,124,569 11.8% 

Other a 802 0.7% 68,809 0.7% 

Two or More Races b 1,844 1.6% 222,661 2.3% 

Total 112,580 100.0% 9,519,338 100.0% 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.; U.S. Census Bureau, 2000, P8 Hispanic or Latino by Race 

a Other category includes American Indian, Alaska Native alone, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 

alone, and some other race alone as classified in the 2000 census 

b The new Classification system in the 2000 Census includes an additional category for origin of two or more 

races 

Age Distribution of Population 

• As shown in Table 2.3-4 and Figure 2.3-3, in both Inglewood and Los Angeles 

County, the age group 35 to 64 is the largest portion of the population. This broad 

age group is considered to be the most experienced segment of the labor force. 

• As shown, in both Inglewood and Los Angeles County, those under age 18 are 

continuing to become an even larger segment of the population. This group 

consists primarily of minors who are not of working age. With increased childhood 

populations, growing needs for more children and youth services will continue. 

• In both Inglewood and Los Angeles County, those in the entry level labor force age 

group, 18 to 34 years of age, have declined significantly from their 1990 levels. 

• With respect to those 65 years and over, the proportion of the population in this 

age group has remained relatively constant in both the City of Inglewood and Los 

Angeles County as a whole. 

Table 2.3-4 Age Distribution: 1990 and 2000 

1990 Percent Distribution 2000 Percent Distribution 


Under 18 Years 329,988 30.1% 36,437 32.4% 

18 to 34 Years 36,513 33.3% 29,929 26.6% 

35 to 64 Years 32,597 29.7% 38,236 34.0% 

65 Years & Over 7,494 6.8% 7,978 7.1% 

Total 109,602 100.0% 112,580 100.0% 

Median Age 29.1 29.6 


Under 18 Years 2,326,110 26.2% 2,667,976 28.0% 

18 to 34 Years 2,846,835 32.1% 2,562,379 26.9% 

35 to 64 Years 2,829,632 31.9% 3,362,310 35.3% 

65 Years & Over 860,587 9.7% 926,673 9.7% 

Total 8,863,164 100.0% 9,519,338 100.0% 


SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990 and 2000 

2.3-6 




Other, 0.7% 

Two or More 

Races, 1.6% 

Non-Hispanic 

Asian, 1.1% 

White, 4.1% 

African American, 

46.4% 

Hispanic or Latino 

(of any race), 

46.0% 


Other, 0.7% 

Two or More 

Races, 2.3% 


9.5% 

Asian, 11.8% 

Non-Hispanic 

White, 31.1% 



44.6% 

Figure 2.3-2 Race and Ethnicity: 2000 

SOURCE: 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 

U.S. Bureau of the Census 1990 and 2000 


2.3-7



40.0% 

35.0% 

30.0% 

32.4% 

30.1% 

33.3% 

26.6% 

29.7% 

34.0% 

25.0% 

20.0% 

1990 

2000 

15.0% 

10.0% 

5.0% 

6.8% 

7.1% 

0.0% 

Under 18 Years 18 to 34 Years 35 to 64 Years 65 Years & 

Over 


40.0% 

35.0% 

30.0% 

25.0% 

28.0% 

26.2% 

32.1% 

26.9% 

31.9% 

35.3% 

20.0% 

1990 

2000 

15.0% 

10.0% 

9.7% 

9.7% 

5.0% 

0.0% 


Over 

Figure 2.3-3 

Age Distributions in Inglewood and Los Angeles County 

2.3-8 



Educational Attainment 

• As shown in Table 2.3-5 and Figure 2.3-4, the City’s population age 25 years and 

older has achieved markedly lower levels of higher education than those for the 

South Bay Cities and Los Angeles County. 

• In 2000, about 20.4 percent of the population age 25 years and older in Inglewood 

had received an Associate Arts or higher college degree, compared to 31.9 percent 

in the South Bay and 31.1 percent in the County. 

• About 36.3 percent of the adult population in Inglewood had not achieved a high 

school diploma, compared to 31.2 percent in the South Bay and 30.0 percent in the 

County. 

• Nearly 80 percent of the population of Inglewood 25 years and older have not 

received a college degree, compared to 68.1 percent in the South Bay and 

68.8 percent in the County. This has strong implications for the future skills and 

training requirements of the labor force of Inglewood. 

Table 2.3-5 

Educational Attainment of Population 25 Years and Older: 

2000 

Highesst Level of Education Attained Inglewood % of Total 

South Bay 

Cities % of Total 

Los Angeles 

County % of Total 

Less than 9 th grade 12,073 18.7% 45,803 7.8% 955,932 16.2% 

Less than 12 th grade, no 

diploma 

11,346 17.6% 13,181 23.4% 814,592 13.8% 

High school graduate 

(includes equivalency) 

12,979 20.1% 120,950 20.5% 1,108,314 18.8% 

Some college, no degree 15,021 23.3% 96,826 16.4% 1,174,477 20.0% 

Associate’s degree 4,562 7.1% 23,040 3.9% 367,244 6.2% 

Bachelor’s degree 5,536 8.6% 147,777 25.0% 945,634 16.1% 

Post-graduate degree 3,072 4.8% 17,547 3.0% 516,755 8.8% 

Total 64,589 100.0% 590,124 100.0% 5,882,948 100.0% 

Associate degree or higher 13,170 20.4% 188,364 31.9% 1,829,633 31.1% 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc 

U.S. Census Bureau, 2000, P37 


2.3-9


90.0% 

80.0% 

70.0% 

79.6% 

68.1% 

68.9% 

60.0% 

50.0% 

40.0% 

30.0% 

20.0% 

10.0% 

20.4% 

31.9% 31.1% 

0.0% 

Below AA 

AA or Higher 

Inglewood South Bay Cities Los Angeles County 

Figure 2.3-4 AA Degree and Above in City of Inglewood, South Bay Cities, 

and L.A County: 2000 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc., U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. 

Labor Force 

Distribution by Type of Job 

• As shown in Table 2.3-6, sales and office occupations are the largest category of 

the labor force in the City of Inglewood at 30.7 percent. This is slightly higher than 

Los Angeles County, which has 27.6 percent of the labor force employed in sales 

and office occupations. 

• The Management and Professional occupations comprised 24.6 percent of 

Inglewood’s labor force while 34.3 percent of Los Angeles County’s labor force fell 

into this category. 

• Within Inglewood, 20.5 percent of the labor force is employed in service 

occupations compared with 14.7 percent for Los Angeles County. 

• Production and Construction related occupations employ nearly identical 

proportions of Inglewood’s and Los Angeles County’s labor forces. 

2.3-10 



Table 2.3-6 Labor Force: 2000 

2000 % of Total 


Management and Professional 10,425 24.6% 

Service 8,707 20.5% 

Sales and Office 13,027 30.7% 

Farming, Fishing and Forestry 84 0.2% 

Construction, extraction, and management 3,216 7.6% 

Production, Transportation and Material Move 6,916 16.3% 

Total 42,375 100.0% 


Management and Professional 1,355,973 34.3% 

Service 580,809 14.7% 

Sales and Office 1,090,059 27.6% 

Farming, Fishing and Forestry 6,650 0.2% 

Construction, extraction, and management 306,450 7.8% 

Production, Transportation and Material Move 613,474 15.5% 

Total 3,953,415 100.0% 

SOURCE: 


U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 

Comparative Unemployment Rates 

• Table 2.3-7 and Figure 2.3-5 shows the unemployment rates for the City of 

Inglewood in comparison to cities in the South Bay with populations over 25,000, 

and Los Angeles County. These cities include Carson, Gardena, Hawthorne, 

Lawndale, Manhattan Beach, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, and Torrance. 

• As shown, in 2004, the unemployment rate in Inglewood was the second highest 

among the South Bay Cities at 8.3 percent, compared to 6.6 percent for Los 

Angeles County. 

• Amongst the South Bay Cities with populations over 25,000, Hawthorne had the 

highest rate of unemployment at 8.7. In contrast, Manhattan Beach and Rancho 

Palos Verdes had the lowest rates of unemployment with 2.2 percent each. 

• Between 1994 and 2004, all of the South Bay Cities shown had substantial 

decreases in unemployment rates with the exception of Hawthorne, which 

remained constant. 

• Between 1994 and 2004, Inglewood’s unemployment rate dropped by 50.6 percent 

from 12.5 percent in 1994 to 8.3 percent in 2004. 


2.3-11


Table 2.3-7 Comparative Unemployment Rates: 1994 and 2004 

Jurisdictions 1994 2004 

1994–2004 

Percent Change 

South Bay Cities 

Inglewood 12.5% 8.3% -50.6% 

Carson 9.1% 6.6% -37.9% 

Gardena 7.5% 6.1% -23.0% 

Hawthorne 8.7% 8.7% 0.0% 

Lawndale 9.5% 6.5% -46.2% 

Manhattan Beach 3.0% 2.2% -36.4% 

Rancho Palos Verdes 3.0% 2.2% -36.4% 

Redondo Beach 4.3% 3.4% 26.5% 

Torrance 5.0% 3.2% -56.3% 

Los Angeles County 9.3% 6.6% -40.9% 

SOURCE: 


Bureau of Labor Statistics 

10.0% 

9.0% 

8.0% 

7.0% 

6.0% 

8.7% 

8.3% 

6.6% 

6.5% 

6.1% 

6.6% 

5.0% 

4.0% 

3.0% 

2.0% 

3.4% 

3.2% 

2.2% 

2.2% 

1.0% 

0.0% 

Hawthorne 


Carson 

Lawndale 

Gardena 

Redondo Beach 

Torrance 

Manhattan Beach 

Rancho Palos Verdes 


Figure 2.3-5 Comparative Unemployment Rates: 2004 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.; Bureau of Labor Statistics 

Household Income 

• As shown in Table 2.3-8, in 2000 about 68.4 percent of Inglewood households 

earned below $50,000, compared with 47.7 percent in the South Bay. In Los 

Angeles County, an estimated 56.9 percent of households earned below $50,000. 

2.3-12 



• As shown in Table 2.3-9 and Figure 2.3-6, the average household income in 

nominal dollars for the City was $44,656 in 2000, significantly lower than the South 

Bay and the County. 

• As shown, the average household income in constant 2006 dollars for the City was 

$54,732 in 2000, much lower than the average household incomes of the South Bay 

cities and the County. 

• As shown in constant 2006 dollars, the average household income in the City 

remained relatively flat, actually declining slightly, from 1990 to 2000, compared to 

the South Bay and Los Angeles County where average household incomes grew by 

about 4.3 and 3.2 percent, respectively. 

Table 2.3-8 

Distribution of Income: 1990–2000 (in nominal dollars) 

1990 % of Total 2000 % of Total 

1990–2000 

Change in 

Households 


Less than $10,000 5,282 14.5% 5,162 14.0% -2.3% 

$10,000–24,999 9,578 26.3% 8,048 21.8% -16.0% 

$25,000–49,999 13,108 36.0% 11,992 32.6% -8.5% 

$50,000–99,999 7,539 20.7% 9,127 24.8% 21.1% 

$100,000+ 892 2.5% 2,505 6.8% 180.8% 

Total 36,399 100.0% 36,834 100.0% 1.2% 

SouthBay Cities 

Less than $10,000 21,524 8.4% 19,771 7.4% -8.1% 

$10,000–24,999 44,745 17.5% 39,309 14.8% -12.1% 

$25,000–49,999 79,862 31.2% 67,618 25.4% -15.3% 

$50,000–99,999 80,212 31.4% 83,204 31.3% 3.7% 

$100,000+ 29,218 11.4% 55,882 21.0% 91.3% 

Total 255,561 100.0% 265,784 100.0% 4.0% 


Less than $10,000 383,060 12.8% 330,000 10.5% -13.9% 

$10,000–24,999 680,398 22.7% 602,111 19.2% -11.5% 

$25,000–49,999 953,229 31.8% 853,372 27.2% -10.8% 

$50,000–99,999 742,333 24.8% 877,071 28.0% 18.2% 

$100,000+ 235,323 7.9% 473,725 15.1% 101.3% 

Total 2,994,323 100.0% 3,136,279 100.0% 4.7% 


U.S. Census Data, 1990 and 2000 


2.3-13


Table 2.3-9 

Average Household Income 

Description 1990 a 2000 a % Change 

Inglewood $35,433 $44,656 26.0% 

South Bay cities $55,614 $73,477 32.1% 

Los Angeles County $47,252 $61,811 30.8% 

Description 1990 b 2000 b % Change 

Inglewood $55,033 $54,732 -0.5% 

South Bay cities $86,377 $90,056 4.3% 


SOURCES: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 

U.S. Census Data, 1990 and 2000 

a In nominal dollars 

b In constant 2006 dollars 

$100,000 

$90,000 

$86,377 

$90,056 

$80,000 

$70,000 

$73,390 

$75,758 

$60,000 

$50,000 

$55,033 

$54,732 

$40,000 

$30,000 


1990 2000 

Figure 2.3-6 Average Annual Household Income: 1990–2000 

(in constant 2006 dollars) 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990 and 2000 

Projected Population, Household and Employment Growth 

• As shown in Table 2.3-10 and Figure 2.3-7, projections provided by the Southern 

California Association of Governments; (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan 

(RTP) 2004 suggest that the City of Inglewood will experience modest growth in 

population, households, and employment over the period 2000-2030. 

2.3-14 



Table 2.3-10 

Population, Households and Employment Projections: 

2000 to 2030 a 2000–2030 

Jurisdiction 2000 2030 

Numerical 

Change 

Average 

Annual Change 

Percent 

Change 


Population 112,580 133,072 20,492 0.56% 18.2% 

Households 36,834 44,812 7,978 0.66% 21.7% 

Employment b 32,900 37,000 4,100 0.39% 12.5% 

Jobs/Household Ratio 0.89 0.83 -0.07 -0.26% 7.6% 

South Bay Cities c 

Population 729,615 886,020 156,405 0.65% 21.4% 

Households 265,784 311,966 46,182 0.54% 17.4% 

Employment 394,200 497,491 103,291 0.78% 26.2% 

Jobs/Household Ratio 1.48 1.59 0.11 0.24% 7.5% 


Population 9,519,330 12,096,899 2,577,569 0.80% 27.1% 

Households 3,108,889 4,083,459 974,570 0.91% 31.3% 

Employment 4,431,307 5,633,695 1,202,388 0.80% 27.1% 

Jobs/Household Ratio 1.43 1.38 -0.05 -0.11% -3.2% 


Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), RTP 2004 

U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census2000 

Notes: 

a All estimates for employment estimates and projections are based on SCAG RTP 2004 projections. Population 

and household estimates for the year 2000 are from the U.S. Census 2000. 

b Preliminary estimates of revision to the SCAG RTP 2004 as provided by SCAG staff in April 2006. 

c The South Bay Cities includes the Cities of Carson, El Segundo, Gardena, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, 

Inglewood, Lawndale, Lomita, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Estates, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, 

Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, and Torrance 

• As shown, population is projected to grow from 112,580 in 2000 (U.S. Census 

estimates) to 133,072 in 2030, representing an annual average growth rate of 

0.56 percent. 

• Households are expected to grow slightly faster than population at an annual rate 

of about 0.66 percent. 

• Employment in Inglewood is projected to increase by nearly 4,100 jobs, according 

to preliminary corrections being made to SCAG RTP 2004. 

• Employment is projected to increase from about 32,900 jobs in 2000 to an 

estimated 37,000 by the year 2030. At an average annual rate of 0.39 percent. 

• As a result of the faster population growth relative to employment growth, the 

jobs-housing ratio in Inglewood of 0.89 in 2000 is expected to decrease slightly to 

0.83 in 2030. 


2.3-15


40.0% 

Percent Change: 2000 to 2030 

35.0% 

30.0% 

25.0% 

20.0% 

15.0% 

10.0% 

5.0% 

0.0% 

26.2% 

27.1% 27.1% 

21.4% 

18.2% 

12.5% 

Inglewood South Bay Los Angeles County 

Population 

Employment 

Figure 2.3-7 

Projected Population and Employment Growth: Percent Change 

2000 to 2030 1 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), RTP 2004, 



• As shown in Table 2.3-10, projections for the South Bay Cities are shown to 

provide a demographic picture of an area more closely related to Inglewood than 

Los Angeles County as a whole. 

• The South Bay Cities’ population and households are projected to increase at 

relatively similar average annual rates to the City of Inglewood, 0.65 percent and 

0.54 percent, respectively. 

• Employment is projected to increase at an annual rate of about 0.78 percent and 

the number of jobs per household is expected to increase from 1.48 in 2000 to 1.59 

in 2030. 

• It is important to note that the jobs-per-household ratio for the South Bay Cities is, 

in 2000, appreciably higher than that of Inglewood. In addition, the ratio is 

projected to continue widening from 2000 to 2030, while Inglewood is expected to 

increase slightly to 1.38 in 2030. 


• The County is projected to grow more rapidly than both Inglewood and the South 

Bay Cities as a whole over this time period, increasing in population at an average 

annual rate of 0.80 percent, and number of households increasing at an annual rate 


• The County’s employment is project to increase at an average rate of 0.80 percent 

annually, about the same as population growth. However, since the number of 

2.3-16 



households is growing more rapidly than employment, the jobs-to-household ratio 

is expected to decline marginally over this projection period. 

Business Overview 

Employment data for the City of Inglewood and Los Angeles County from 1994 to 2004 

was provided by the California Economic Development Department (EDD). This 

information categorizes employment and payroll data by industry sector. Employment 

data is grouped by the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) from 

2001 to 2004 and the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) for 1994. The North 

American Industry Classification System was developed by representatives from the 

United States, Canada, and Mexico, and replaces each country's separate classification 

system with one uniform system for classifying industries. In the United States, NAICS 

replaces the SIC, a system that federal, state, and local governments, the business 

community, and the general public have used since the 1930s. 

Almost 70.0 percent of the jobs in Inglewood were in three sectors; Retail & 

Entertainment; Health Care and Other Services; and Government and Local Services. In 

contrast, Manufacturing and Transportation only represent about 9.0 percent of the jobs. 

Overall 1994 to 2004 Employment Trends 

• As shown in Table 2.3-11, the City’s total employment (including self-employment) 

grew marginally from 30,886 in 1994 to 31,127 in 2004, at an annual average 

growth rate of 0.1 percent. 

• In 2004, services formed the largest employment sector in the City with nearly 

32 percent of the total jobs, as shown in Figure 2.3-8. 

• Employment in services grew by a total of 1.0 percent from 9,814 in 1994 to 9,914 

in 2004, at annual average rate of 0.1 percent. 

• Manufacturing and Retail jobs declined by about 36 percent and 31 percent, 

respectively, over the1994 to 2004 time period. 

• Wholesale Trade, Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (FIRE), and Construction 

declined in the 8 percent to 13 percent range from 1994 to 2004, as shown in 

Table 2.3-11. 

NAICS Sectoral Employment and Salary Trends: 2001 to 2004 

The following presents sectoral trends by NAICS categories from 2001 to 2004 based on 

data provided by the California Employment Development Department (EDD). The data 

provided included information on employment by sector, number of establishments per 

sector and payroll and wage trends by sector. 

Employment by NAICS 2001 -2004 

• Employment data from EDD was adjusted to include estimated self-employment 

by NAICS sectors using factors shown in Appendix A (Appendix Table A-2). 


2.3-17


Table 2.3-11 

City of Inglewood Employment by Sector: 1994 to 2004 a 

Sectors b 1994 2004 Percent Change Annual Average Growth Rate 

Construction 627 578 -7.8% -0.8% 

Farming, Fishing, Forestry, Mining 82 30 -63.4% -9.6% 

FIRE 1,326 1,201 -9.4% -1.0% 

Government 5,429 4,977 -8.3% -0.9% 

Manufacturing 2,867 1,829 -36.2% -4.4% 

Retail 4,300 2,957 31.2% -3.7% 

Services 9,814 9,914 1.0% 0.1% 

Wholesale 1,619 1,410 -12.9% -1.4% 

Other c 4,823 8,321 72.5% 5.6% 

Total 30,889 31,217 1.1% 0.1% 


California Employment Development Department 

a Based on SIC for 1994 and NAICS for 2004, as shown in Appendix Table 1. 

b Includes estimates for self-employment by sectoral rates as shown in Appendix Table 2. 

C Other includes Transportation, Utilities, Warehousing, Non-classified and suppressed data 

35.0% 

31.8% 31.8% 

30.0% 

25.0% 

1994 2004 

20.0% 

17.6% 

15.0% 

15.9% 

13.9% 

10.0% 

9.5% 

9.3% 

5.0% 

0.0% 

5.9% 

Services Government Retail Manufacturing Wholesale FIRE Construction Farming, 

Fishing, 

Forestry, 

Mining 

5.2% 

4.5% 

4.3% 

3.8% 

2.0% 

1.9% 

0.3% 

0.1% 

Figure 2.3-8 

City of Inglewood Comparative Employment Distribution by 

Sector: 1994 to 2004 

2.3-18 



• The adjusted employment distribution including self-employment from 2001 to 

2004 is shown in Table 2.3-12. 

• As shown in Table 2.3-12, total employment declined by 6.2 percent from 33,298 

in 2001 to 31,217 in 2004, at an annual average rate of 2.1 percent. 

• Employment declined in all major non-Public Sector categories except Services, 

Retail, and Construction. 

• Service sector employment grew by 5.4 percent from 9,402 in 2001 to 9,914 in 

2004, whereas employment in the Retail sector grew by 2.9 percent from 2,873 in 

2001 to 2,957 in 2004. 

• Manufacturing declined by 31.9 percent from an estimated 2,685 jobs in 2001 to 

1829 jobs in 2004. 

• Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (FIRE) declined by 32.2 percent and 

Professional and Technical Services declined by 45.8 percent. 

Table 2.3-12 

City of Inglewood Employment by Sector: 2001 to 2004 a 

Industrial Categories 2001 2002 2003 2004 

2001 to 2004 

Percent 

Change 

2001 to 2004 

Annual Average 

Growth Rate 

Professional, Scientific and 

Technical 

759 674 418 411 -45.8% -18.5% 

Finance and Real Estate 1,772 1,475 1,406 1,201 -32.2% -12.2% 

Information 295 282 237 259 -12.2% -4.3% 

Arts, Entertainment and 

Recreation 

3,079 2,693 2,590 2,712 -11.9% -4.1% 

Services 9,402 10,347 9,734 9,914 5.4% 1.8% 

Manufacturing 2,685 2,487 2,244 1,829 -31.9% -12.0% 

Retail 2,873 2,762 2,884 2,957 2.9% 1.0% 

Wholesale 1,449 1,408 1,437 1,410 -2.7% -0.9% 

Government 4,651 5,181 5,079 4,977 7.0% 2.3% 

Construction 454 445 523 578 27.4% 8.4% 

Transportation 

4,099 3,445 3,227 3,344 -18.4% -6.6% 

Warehousing 

Other 1,780 2,045 1,788 1,626 -8.6% -3.0% 

Total 33,298 33,246 31,565 31,217 -6.2% -2.1% 

Services 

Accommodation and Food 

Services 

1,963 2,007 2,134 2,209 12.5% 4.0% 

Admin Support, Waste 

Mgmt 

1,203 924 737 998 -17.0% -6.0% 

Educational Services 345 374 374 373 8.0% 2.6% 

Health Care and Social 

Services 

4,385 5,588 4,974 4,930 12.4% 4.0% 

Other Services 1,506 1,454 1,514 1,404 -6.7% -2.3% 

Total 9,402 10,347 9,734 9,914 5.4% 1.8% 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.; California Employment Development Department 

a Includes estimates for self-employment by sector not originally provided in the California Employment 

Development Department 


2.3-19


• Of the service sector categories, as shown in Table 2.3-12, Accommodation and 

Food Services, and Health Care and Social Services each grew by 12.5 percent each 

from 2001 to 2004, at annual average growth rates of 4.0 percent. 

• As shown in Figure 2.3-9, in 2004 Health Care and Social Services comprised 

nearly 50 percent of Services-related employment followed by Accommodation and 

Food Services at 22.3 percent. 

60.0% 

50.0% 

49.7% 

40.0% 

30.0% 

22.3% 

20.0% 

14.2% 

10.0% 

10.1% 

3.8% 

0.0% 


Services 

Accomodation and 

Food Services 

Other Services 


Mgmt 

Educational Services 

Figure 2.3-9 

SOURCE: 

City of Inglewood Service Sector Categories as Percent of Service 

Sector Employment: 2004 

Stanley R.Hoffman Associates, Inc., California Employment Development Department (EDD) 

Wage and Salary Trends 2001–2004 

• Table 2.3-13 shows payroll data, in Constant 2005 dollars, for the City of 

Inglewood from the EDD for the 2001 to 2004. 

• According to the EDD, the City of Inglewood had 1,853 establishments with 

28,564 employees in 2004. 

• As shown in Table 2.3-13, the annual average salary in the City of Inglewood 

declined by 4.5 percent in constant 2005 dollars from $42,683 to $40,773 from 

2001 to 2004. 

• As shown in Figure 2.3-10, in 2004, Arts, Entertainment and Recreation jobs had 

the highest average salary of $81,424, followed by Government and Manufacturing 

jobs at $47,253 and $44,159, respectively. 

2.3-20 



Table 2.3-13 Number of Establishments, Employment, and Wages: 2001–2004 

Establishments Employment Annual Average Salary (Constant 2005) 

2001 1004 % Change 

Average Growth 

Rate (%) 2001 1004 % Change 2001 1004 % Change 

Professional, Scientific, and Technical 65 67 3.08 1.02 602 326 -45.85 $38,180 $32,634 -14.5 

Finance and Real Estate 122 120 -1.64 -0.55 1,571 1,045 -33.48 71355 41,209 -42.2 

Information 15 19 26.67 8.20 278 244 -12.23 77,008 55,288 -28.2 

Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 27 31 14.81 4.71 2,433 2,143 -11.92 66,194 81,424 23.0 

Services 720 760 5.56 11.82 8,694 9,188 5.68 29,159 31,954 9.6 

Manufacturing 90 76 -15.56 -5.48 2,616 1,782 -31.88 41,924 44,153 5.3 

Retail 267 265 -0.75 -0.25 2,873 2,957 2.92 27,935 24,062 -13.9 

Wholesale 87 97 11.49 3.69 1,363 1,326 -2.71 42,295 36,102 -14.6 

Government 11 13 18.18 5.73 4,618 4,916 6.44 46,999 47,253 0.5 

Construction 55 62 12.73 4.07 369 470 27.37 36,049 32,115 -10.9 

Transportation Warehousing 304 328 7.89 2.57 3,913 3,192 -18.43 39,277 42,526 8.3 

Other 12 15 32.61 9.86 1,138 975 -14.28 85,990 49,761 -42.1 

Total 1,775 1,853 4.44 1.46 30,468 28,564 -6.25 $42,683 $40,773 -4.5 

Services 

Accommodation and Food Services 143 160 11.89 3.82 1,868 2,102 12.53 $15,281 $14,549 -4.8 

Admin. Support, Waste Mgmt. 73 75 2.74 0.91 1,010 838 -17.03 24,565 24,873 1.3 

Educational Services 17 24 41.18 12.18 339 366 7.96 37,176 38,873 4.6 

Health Care and Social Services 299 316 5.69 1.86 4,039 4,541 12.43 44,103 42,627 -3.3 

Other Services 188 185 -1.6 -053 1,438 3,341 -6.75 23,803 25,630 7.7 

Subtotal 720 760 5.56 1.82 8,694 9,188 9.15 $32,013 $31,954 -0.2 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffmann Associates, Inc. 

California Employment Development Department (EDD) 


2.3-21


• As shown in Figure 2.3-10, average salaries in the Wholesale, Services and Retail 

sectors are below the City average salaries of $40,733. These sectors comprised 

nearly 47 percent of the total employment in the City in 2004. 

• As shown in Figure 2.3-11, amongst the Services-related jobs, the average salary in 

Health Care and Social Services was the highest at $42,627—slightly higher than 

the City average. Average salary in the Accommodation and Food Services sector 

was the lowest at $14,549. 

$90,000 

$80,000 

$81,424 

$70,000 

$60,000 

$50,000 

$40,000 

$47,253 

$44,153 

$42,526 

$41,209 $40,773 

$36,102 

$31,954 

$30,000 

$24,062 

$20,000 

$10,000 

$0 

Arts, 

Ente r tainm e nt 

and Recreation 

Government Manufacturing Transportation 

Warehousing 

Finance and 

Real Estate 

Average City 

Wage 

Wholesale Services Retail 

Figure 2.3-10 

SOURCE: 

City of Inglewood Average Annual Salary in 8 Largest 

Employment Sectors: 2004 (Constant 2005 Dollars) 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc., California Employment Development Department. 

2.3-22 



$45,000 

$40,000 

$42,627 

$38,873 

$35,000 

$30,000 

$25,000 

$25,630 

$24,873 

$20,000 

$15,000 

$14,549 

$10,000 

$5,000 

$0 

Health Care and 

Social Services 

Educational Services Other Services Admin Support, 

Waste Mgm t 


Food Services 

Figure 2.3-11 

SOURCE: 

City of Inglewood Average Annual Salary in Service Sector 

Industries: 2004 (Constant 2005 Dollars) 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc., California Employment Development Department. 

Distribution of Establishments by Sector and Size: 2001 to 2004 

• As shown in Table 2.3-14, the number of establishments in the City grew 

marginally by 4.4 percent between 2001 and 2004 from 1,775 in 2001 to 1,853 in 

2004. 

• Services-related establishments grew by 5.56 percent from 720 in 2001 to 760 in 

2004. 

• Manufacturing establishments declined by 15.5 percent from 90 in 2001 to 76 in 

2004. 

• As shown in Figure 2.3-12, in 2004, Transportation and Warehousing comprised 

about 18 percent of the City’s total establishments, followed closely by Health Care 

and Social Services establishments at about 17 percent. 

• The average number of employees per establishment in the City across all sectors 

declined from 17 in 2001 to 15 in 2004, as shown in Table 2.3-14. 

• Employee per establishment in the Professional, Scientific and Technical sector 

declined by about 48 percent from 9 in 2001 to 5 in 2004. 

• Per establishment employment for the Services and Retail sectors remained 

constant between 2001 and 2004 at 12 and 11, respectively. 


2.3-23


Table 2.3-14 

City of Inglewood Distribution of Establishments by Sectors: 

2001 to 2004 

Average Establishment Size 

Establishments 

(Employees) 

2001 2004 % Change 2001 2004 % Change 

Professional, Scientific, and Technical 65 67 3.08 9 5 -47.5 

Finance and Real Estate 122 120 -1.64 13 9 -32.4 

Information 15 19 26.67 19 13 -30.7 

Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 27 31 14.81 90 69 -23.3 

Services 720 760 5.56 12 12 00.1 

Manufacturing 90 76 -15.56 29 23 -19.3 

Retail 267 265 -0.75 11 11 3.7 

Wholesale 87 97 11.49 16 14 -12.7 

Government 11 13 18.18 420 278 -9.9 

Construction 55 62 12.73 7 8 13.0 

Transportation Warehousing 304 328 7.89 13 10 -24.4 

Other 12 15 32.61 99 64 -35.4 

Total 1,775 1,853 4.44 17 15 -10.2 

Services 

Accommodation and Food Services 143 160 11.89 13 13 0.6 

Admin. Support, Waste Mgmt. 73 75 2.74 14 11 -19.2 

Educational Services 17 24 41.18 20 15 -23.5 

Health Care and Social Services 299 316 5.69 14 14 6.4 

Other Services 188 185 -1.60 8 7 -5.2 

Subtotal 720 760 5.56 12 12 0.1 



2.3-24 



20.0% 

18.0% 

17.7% 

17.1% 

16.0% 

14.0% 

14.3% 

12.0% 

10.0% 

8.6% 

8.0% 

6.5% 

6.0% 

4.0% 

5.2% 

4.1% 

2.0% 

0.0% 


Warehousing 



Retail 

Accom odation 

and Food 

Services 

Finance and Real 

Es tate 

Wholesale 

Manufacturing 

Figure 2.3-12 

SOURCE: 

City of Inglewood Distribution of Establishments by Sectors: 

2004 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc., California Employment Development Department 

Sectoral Clustering in the City of Inglewood 

• Table 2.3-15 shows the distribution of firms by ZIP codes based on data from the 

U.S. Census 2003 County Business Patterns. The number of establishments in the 

County Business Patterns data is about 8 percent higher than the EDD estimates 

for 2004. 

• As shown Table 2.3-15, the City of Inglewood, as defined by the ZIP codes 90301, 

90302, 90303, 90304 and 90305, had a total of 1,996 firms in 2003. Establishments 

listed under ZIP code 90304 also include those in the City of Lennox. 

• As shown in Figure 2.3-13, nearly 50 percent of the firms in the City are located in 

ZIP code 90301, followed by 16.8 percent in 90302. 

• Using the distribution of firms by sector within each ZIP code, and comparing this 

distribution to the citywide distribution provides a rough estimate of concentration 

of sectors by geography. 

• As shown in Table 2.3-16, indexing the distribution of firms by sector by ZIP 

codes to the City-wide sectoral distribution results in locational indices or relative 

concentration of firms by sector by ZIP code. 

• Location of Health Care and Social Services firms is 1.8 and 1.3 times higher in 

ZIP codes 90305 and 90301, respectively, compared to the average sectoral 

distribution in the City. 

• Manufacturing related firms are around 2.3 times more concentrated in ZIP code 

90302 compared to the City average. 

• Transportation and Warehousing related firms are relatively more concentrated in 

ZIP codes 90301 and 90304. 


2.3-25


Table 2.3-15 City of Inglewood Distribution of Firms by ZIP Codes: 2003 

90301 90302 90303 90304 90305 90311 Total 

NAICS Categories Qty. % Qty. % Qty. % Qty. % Qty. % Qty. % Qty. % 

Forestry, Fishing, 

Hunting, and 

1 0.1 — — 1 0.4 — — — — — — 2 0.1 

Agriculture 

Utilities — — — — 1 0.4 — — — — — — 1 0.1 

Construction 19 1.9 26 7.7 5 2.0 9 2.9 4 3.3 — — 63 3.2 

Manufacturing 37 3.8 33 9.8 5 2.0 8 2.6 2 1.7 — — 85 4.3 

Wholesale Trade 58 5.9 31 9.2 13 5.3 14 4.5 4 3.3 — — 120 6.0 

Retail Trade 112 11.4 38 111.3 63 25.6 51 16.5 21 17.4 — — 285 14.3 

Transportation & 

Warehousing 

190 19.3 49 14.6 29 11.8 75 24.3 1 0.8 — — 344 17.2 

Information 9 0.9 5 1.5 4 1.6 3 1.0 — — — — 21 1.1 

Finance & Insurance 32 3.3 9 2.7 13 5.3 2 0.6 3 2.5 1 50.0 60 3.0 

Real Estate & Rental 

& Leasing 

37 3.8 15 4.5 10 4.1 12 3.9 4 3.3 — — 78 3.9 

Professional, Scientific 

& Technical Services 

43 4.4 15 4.5 10 4.1 10 3.2 3 2.5 — — 81 4.1 

Management of 

Companies & 

2 0.2 — — 1 0.4 1 0.3 — — — — 4 0.2 

Enterprises 

Admin. Support, 

Waste Mgmt., 31 3.2 14 4.2 5 2.0 13 4.2 6 5.0 1 50.0 70 3.5 

Remediation Services 

Educational Services 14 1.4 5 1.5 2 0.8 1 00.3 6 5.0 — — 28 1.4 

Health Care And 

Social Assistance 

216 22.0 33 9.8 30 12.2 18 5.8 37 30.6 — — 334 16.7 

Arts, Entertainment & 

Recreation 

13 1.3 4 1.2 6 2.4 5 1.6 2 1.7 — — 30 1.5 

Accommodation & 

Food Services 

57 5.8 18 5.4 17 6.9 57 18.4 10 8.3 — — 159 8.0 


(Except Public 107 10.9 36 10.7 28 11.4 29 9.4 17 14.0 — — 217 10.9 

Administration 

Unclassified 


4 0.4 5 1.5 3 1.2 1 0.3 1 0.8 — — 14 0.7 

Total 982 100 336 100 246 100 309 100 121 100 2 100 1,996 100 

% of City Total 49.2 16.8 12.3 15.5 6.1 0.1 100 

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns, 2003 

2.3-26 



Figure 2.3-13 City of Inglewood Sectoral Concentration of Establishments by 

ZIP Codes: 2003 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc., U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns, 2003. 

Table 2.3-16 City of Inglewood Locational Index of Sectors by ZIP Codes: 2003 

NAICS Categories 90301 90302 90303 90304 90305 90311 Total 

Forestry, Fishing, Hunting, and Agriculture 1.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 

Utilities 0.0 0.0 8.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 

Construction 0.6 2.5 0.6 0.9 1.0 0.0 1.0 

Manufacturing 0.9 2.3 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.0 1.0 

Wholesale Trade 1.0 1.5 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.0 1.0 

Retail Trade 0.8 0.8 1.8 1.2 1.2 0.0 1.0 

Transportation & Warehousing 1.1 0.8 0.7 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 

Information 0.9 1.4 1.5 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.0 

Finance & Insurance 1.1 0.9 1.8 0.2 0.8 16.6 1.0 

Real Estate & Rental & Leasing 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.0 1.0 

Professional, Scientific & Technical Services 1.1 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.0 1.0 

Management Of Companies & Enterprises 1.0 0.0 2.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 1.0 

Admin. Support, Waste Mgt, Remediation Services 0.9 1.2 0.6 1.2 1.4 14.3 1.0 

Educational Services 1.0 1.1 0.6 0.2 3.5 0.0 1.0 

Health Care And Social Assistance 1.3 0.6 0.7 0.3 1.8 0.0 1.0 

Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 0.9 0.8 1.6 1.1 1.1 0.0 1.0 

Accommodation & Food Services 0.7 0.7 0.9 2.3 1.0 0.0 1.0 

Other Services (Except Public Administration 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.3 0.0 1.0 

Unclassified Establishments 0.6 2.1 1.7 0.5 1.2 0.0 1.0 

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns, 2003 


2.3-27


City of Inglewood Compared with the Los Angeles County Economy 

• Table 2.3-17 shows the relative specialization of Inglewood compared to Los 

Angles County. This is shown by indexing the employment distribution of the City 

of Inglewood to the County. 

• In 2004, Inglewood had a 4.4-times higher share of employment in the Arts, 

Entertainment and Recreation sector compared to the County. This can be 

explained by the relatively higher impact of the Hollywood Park Race Track and 

Casino on the City’s employment base. 

• The economy of Inglewood was also relatively more specialized in Transportation 

and Warehousing (3.2) and Health Care and Social Services (1.7). 

• Employment share in Retail, and Accommodation and Food Services sectors were 

comparable to the County-wide shares. 

• However, the below–average employment shares in Professional, Scientific and 

Technical (0.2), Information (0.2), Manufacturing (0.5) and Finance, Insurance and 

Real Estate (0.6) indicate sectors for potential future growth in the City. 

Table 2.3-17 

City of Inglewood and Los Angeles County Comparative Sectoral 

Specialization by Employment Distribution: 2004 


Los Angeles County Index: LA = 

Employment 

% 

Distribution Employment 

% 

Distribution 

1 


Professional, Scientific, and Technical 326 1.1 239,998 5.9 0.2 

Finance and Real Estate 1,045 3.7 236,790 5.8 0.6 

Information 244 0.9 216,122 5.3 0.2 

Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 2,143 7.5 68,511 1.7 4.4 

Services* 9,188 32.2 1,234,624 30.5 1.1 

Manufacturing 1,782 6.2 481,790 11.9 0.5 

Retail 2,957 10.4 406,540 10.0 1.0 

Wholesale 1,326 4.6 215,636 5.3 0.9 

Government 4,916 17.2 516,058 12.7 1.4 

Construction 470 1.6 140,813 3.5 0.5 

Transportation Warehousing 3,192 11.2 142,261 3.5 3.2 

Other 975 3.4 150,791 3.7 0.9 

Total 28,564 100.0 4,049,934 100.0 

* Services 

Accommodation and Food Services 2,102 7.4 304,889 7.5 1.0 

Admin. Support, Waste Mgmt. 838 2.9 252,292 6.2 0.5 

Educational Services 366 1.3 85,117 2.1 0.6 

Health Care and Social Services 4,541 15.9 370,424 9.1 1.7 

Other Services 1,341 4.7 221,902 5.5 0.9 

Subtotal 9,188 32.2 1,234,624 30.5 1.1 



2.3-28 



Market Conditions and Trends 

City of Inglewood Taxable Sales: 1994 to 2004 

As a major municipal General Fund revenue source, sales tax is a significant contributor 

to the economic vitality of the City. Taxable sales data as obtained from the California 

State Board of Equalization show the following trends: 

• As shown in Table 2.3-18 and Figure 2.3-14, total taxable sales transactions in the 

City of Inglewood have grown from 1994 to 2004, increasing in constant 2005 

dollars from about $675.0 million in 1993 to $833.2 million in 2004. 

• Taxable Retail sales in the City grew annually at an average annual rate of 2.6 

percent over the period 1994-2004. Taxable non-retail sales grew at less than onesixth 

that rate, or about 0.4 percent annually. 

• Trends from 1994 to 2004 show that the City’s taxable sales consist primarily of 

retail sales, and this share has grown. In 1994, taxable retail sales comprised 

77.5 percent of the total taxable sales and in 2004 it comprised 81.1 percent of the 

total taxable sales. This consistent with the decline in manufacturing activity in the 

City from 1994 to 2004. 

Table 2.3-18 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 

(in '000s Constant 2005 Dollars) 

Retail Non Retail Total Share of Retail 

1994 $522,915 $152,058 $674,973 77.5% 

1995 479,344 193,972 673,316 71.2% 

1996 480,565 199,206 679,771 70.7% 

1997 465,249 186,598 651,847 71.4% 

1998 438,059 192,426 630,484 69.5% 

1999 441,728 201,335 643,062 68.7% 

2000 586,583 245,260 831,843 70.5% 

2001 610,516 197,260 807,776 75.6% 

2002 605,810 170,708 776,518 78.0% 

2003 591,870 151,922 743,792 79.6% 

2004 $675,549 $157,614 $833,163 81.1% 

1994 to 2004 Annual 

Average Growth Rate 

2.60% 0.40% 2.10% 


California State Board of Equalization 


2.3-29


$900,000 

$800,000 

$831,843 

$776,518 

$833,163 

$700,000 

$600,000 

$674,973 $679,771 

$630,484 

$586,583 

$605,810 

$675,549 

$522,915 

$500,000 

$400,000 

$300,000 

$480,565 

$438,059 

Retail 

Non-retail 

Total 

$200,000 

$100,000 

$0 

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Figure 2.3-14 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 (in ’000s 

Constant 2005 Dollars) 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc., California State Board of Equalization. 

City of Inglewood Taxable Retail Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 

• Taxable Retail sales in the City of Inglewood followed a pattern of initial decline 

from 1994 to1999 and then rose appreciably from 2000 to 2004. These trends can 

be explained by stronger sales performance in key retail categories including 

General Merchandise, Building Materials and Apparel. 

• As shown in Table 2.3-19, General Merchandise, which is the single largest retail 

category in the City, initially declined from $135.6 million in 1994 to $109.9 million 

in 2000 and then increasing to $159.3 million by 2004 in constant 2005 dollars 

• Building Materials and Apparel retail sales followed patterns similar to General 

Merchandise, reaching a high of $65.1 million and $25.2 million, respectively. 

• The spurt in General Merchandise and Apparel retail sales can be attributed to new 

big box retail development in the City, including the Hollywood Park Marketplace. 

Similarly, the growth in Building Materials sales can be attributed to the Home 

Depot store opened recently at the same center. 

2.3-30 



Table 2.3-19 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales by Retail Category: 1994 

and 2004 

Taxable Transactions ('000s) 

(constant 2005) 

PANEL A 

1994–2000 

% Change 

2000–2004 

% Change 

1994 2000 2004 

Apparel Stores $10,864 $10,654 $25,216 -1.90% 136.70% 

General Merchandise Stores 135,576 109,892 159,289 -18.9% 45.00% 

Food Stores 49,697 50,479 44,582 1.6% -11.70% 

Eating and Drinking Places 78,016 82,736 86,720 6.1% 4.80% 

Home Furnishings 8,460 9,407 8,875 11.2% -5.70% 

Buildings Materials 49,454 38,159 65,102 -22.8% 70.60% 

Auto Dealers and parts 74,153 68,379 83,234 7.8% 21.70% 

Service Stations 59,037 68,939 74,239 16.8% 7.70% 

Other Retail 57,658 147,938 158,363 156.6% 7.00% 

Total Retail $522,915 $586,583 $705,620 12.2% 20.30% 

Non-Retail $201,479 $245,260 $164,630 21.7% -32.90% 

Total $724,394 $831,843 $870,250 14.8% 4.60% 

DOF Population a 114,179 112,580 117,640 

Per Capita Taxable Transactions 


PANEL B 

1994–2000 

% Change 

2000–2004 

% Change 

1994 2000 2004 

Apparel Stores $95 $95 $214 -0.50% 126.50% 

General Merchandise Stores 1,187 976 1,354 -17.8% 38.70% 

Food Stores 435 448 379 3.0% -15.50% 

Eating and Drinking Places 683 735 737 7.6% 0.30% 

Home Furnishings 74 84 75 12.8% -9.70% 

Buildings Materials 433 339 553 -21.7% 63.30% 

Auto Dealers and Parts 649 607 708 -6.5% 16.50% 

Service Stations 517 612 631 18.4% 3.10% 

Other Retail 505 1,314 1,346 160.2% 2.40% 

Total Retail $4,580 $5,210 $5,998 13.8% 15.10% 

Non-Retail $1,765 $2,179 $1,399 23.5% -35.80% 

Total $6,344 $7,389 $7,398 16.5% 0.10% 



California Department of Finance, ES-5 Population Projections 

Population as reported by the California Department of Finance 

a Other Retail includes liquor stores and other ancillary stores. 


2.3-31


Comparative Taxable Retail Sales 

• Figure 2.3-15 and Table 2.3-20 show per capita taxable retail sales in constant 2005 

dollars for Inglewood, nearby South Bay cities and Los Angeles County in year 

2004. 

• Per capita taxable retail sales in Inglewood were lowest at $5,998 amongst the 

largest six cites in the South Bay. 

• In comparison, the South Bay cities and Los Angeles County had average per capita 

taxable retail sales of $8,980 and $8,939, respectively, as shown in Figure 2.3-15. 

$25,000 

$20,000 

$20,916 

$15,000 

$12,725 

$10,000 

$11,027 

$9,599 

$9,256 

$8,980 

$8,939 

$5,998 

$5,000 

$0 

Torrance Carson Redondo 

Beach 

Hawthorne Gardena Inglewood South Bay 

Cities 

Los 

Ange le s 

County 

Figure 2.3-15 

SOURCE: 

City of Inglewood and South Bay Cities Per Capita Taxable 

Retail Sales: 2004 (in Constant 2005 Dollars) 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. California State Board of Equalization. 

2.3-32 



Table 2.3-20 South Bay Cities Taxable Retail Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 

(Constant 2005 Dollars) 

1994 2000 2004 


Growth Rate 

1994–2000 


Growth Rate 

2000–2004 

Panel A: Taxable Transactions ('000s) 


Inglewood $522,918 $586,583 $705,620 1.9% 4.7% 

Carson 848,882 1,147,070 1,225,912 5.1% 1.7% 

El Segundo 211,125 426,402 413,342 12.4% -0.8% 

Gardena 470,047 535,719 561,617 2.2% 1.2% 

Hawthorne 586,809 595,158 846,813 0.2% 9.2% 

Hermosa Beach 147,429 233,235 232,282 7.9% -0.1% 

Lawndale 169,288 188,209 201,640 1.8% 1.7% 

Lomita 91,292 109,699 111,920 3.1% 0.5% 


Palos Verdes Estate 10,501 13,069 11,630 3.7% -2.9% 

Rancho Palos Verdes 60,818 69,599 69,826 2.3% 0.1% 

Redondo Beach 730,851 738,454 738,267 0.2% 0.0% 

Rolling Hills 974 91 933 -32.7% 79.2% 

Rolling Hills Estates 142,164 128,649 127,191 -1.7% -0.3% 

Torrance $2,624,838 $3,164,677 $3,059,289 3.2% -0.8% 

South Bay Cities Total $7,055,575 $6,741,282 $6,921,075 -0.8% 0.7% 

Share of Inglewood 7.41% 8.70% 10.20% 2.7% 4.0% 

Los Angeles County $65,967,009 $82,697,286 $90,346,952 3.8% 2.2% 

Panel B: Per Capita Retail Sales ('000s) 


Carson 9,787 12,784 12,725 4.6% -0.1% 

El Segundo 13,408 26,595 24,505 12.1% -2.0% 

Gardena 8,676 9,277 9,256 1.1% -0.1% 

Hawthorne 7,845 7,076 9,599 -1.7% 7.9% 

Hermosa Beach 7,839 12,563 11,878 8.2% -1.4% 

Lawndale 5,862 5,935 6,069 0.2% 0.6% 

Lomita 4,628 5,472 5,331 2.8% -0.7% 

Manhattan Beach 13,166 15,902 14,930 3.2% -1.6% 

Palos Verdes Estate 765 980 825 4.2% -4.2% 

Rancho Palos Verdes 1,434 1,692 1,617 2.8% -1.1% 

Redondo Beach 11,594 11,673 11,027 0.1% -1.4% 

Rolling Hills 507 48 476 -32.4% 77.1% 


Torrance 19,101 22,941 20,916 3.1% -2.3% 

South Bay Cities Total $9,897 $9,240 $8,980 -1.1% -0.7% 

Los Angeles County $7,108 $8,687 $8,939 3.4% 0.7% 





2.3-33


City of Inglewood Retail Leakage Analysis 

• Table 2.3-21 presents per capita sales in the City of Inglewood as a ratio of those in 

Los Angeles County in 2004. This is provided as a measure of retail leakage from 

the City’s market area. 

• As shown in Table 2.3-21, total per capita retail sales in the City of Inglewood were 

approximately 30 percent lower than those in the County of Los Angeles. 

• Retail categories that performed better than or near par with the County of Los 

Angeles included General Merchandise (1.04) and Other Retail (0.95). 

• Retail categories that indicated high levels of leakage included Home Furnishings 

(0.18), Auto Dealers and Parts (0.37), and Apparel Stores (0.43). 

Table 2.3-21 

City of Inglewood and County of Los Angeles 

Comparative Per Capita Taxable Sales: 2004 


City of Inglewood County of Los Angeles Leakage Factor 

Apparel Stores $214 $497 0.43 

General Merchandise Stores 1,354 1,301 1.04 

Food Stores 379 436 0.87 

Eating and Drinking Places 737 1,244 0.59 

Home Furnishings 75 417 0.18 

Building Materials 553 817 0.68 

Auto Dealers and parts 708 1,899 0.37 

Service Stations 631 911 0.69 

Other Retail a 1,346 1,417 0.95 

Total Retail 5,998 $8,939 0.67 




a Includes liquor stores and other ancillary stores. 

Retail Market Inventory in the City of Inglewood 

• Table 2.3-22 presents the retail market inventory for the City of Inglewood 

compiled from the 2003 Shopping Center Directory and field surveys conducted by 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc in April, 2006. 

• There are a total of 16 shopping centers identified in the City of Inglewood, not 

counting strip commercial and downtown commercial along major arterials. 

• Retail centers in Inglewood have an estimated 1,572,788 square feet of retail space. 

• The newest retail development within the city is located to the east and south of 

Hollywood Park. The Hollywood Park Marketplace, The Village at Century and the 

Costco/Silvercreek Properties (Century Plaza) centers have a total of over 800,000 

square feet of retail space—50 percent of the estimated total square footage. 

2.3-34 



Shopping Center Name 

1. Airport Plaza 

2. Century Hawthorne 

3. Century Plaza 

4. Century Square 

5. Crenshaw Imperial 

Shopping Center 

6. Crenshaw Imperial 

Plaza 

7. Food 4 Less 

8. Hollywood Park 

Plaza 


Marketplace 

10. Inglewood Center 

11. La Brea Plaza 

12. Manchester Business 

Park 

13. Manchester Plaza 

14. Unnamed Shopping 

Center 

15. The Village at 

Century 

Table 2.3-22 City of Inglewood Retail Market Inventory, 2006 

Intersection 

Northwest corner ISIS and 

Manchester—1117 Manchester 

Southeast corner of Century and 

Hawthorne Boulevards 

Southeast corner Yukon Ave and 

Century Blvd 

Southeast corner of Century and 

Hawthorne Boulevards 

Northeast corner Imperial Hwy and 

Crenshaw 

Southeast corner of Imperial Hwy 

and Crenshaw 

Southwest corner of Imperial Hwy 

and Crenshaw 

Southwest corner of Prairie Ave. 

and E. Hardy St. 

Northeast corner of Century and 

Yukon 

Southeast corner of S. Market and 

Florence and East Florence 

Southeast corner of La Brea and 

Centinela 

North side of W. Manchester 

between Isis and Hindry 

Southwest corner of Manchester 

and Eucalyptus 

North side of W. Manchester 

between Ash and Oak 

South side of Century Blvd. east of 

Yukon 

Type a / 

Year Built Total Sq. Ft. Anchors 

N 23,523 

N 

1985 

C 

2005 

N 

1986 

C 

1958 

C 

1960 

12,407 

Anchor Square 

Feet 

210,000 Costco 150,000 

16,309 

152,360 

215,034 

Superior Market 

Rite Aid Pharmacy 

Sav-on Drugs 

RAC Rent-a-Center 

U.S. Post Office 

40,000 

17,000 

22,500 

5,110 

4,800 

C 109,014 Food 4 Less 79,101 

N 30,212 

R 

2005 

C 

1966 

435,000 

102,276 

N 45,100 

N 8,352 

N 4,516 

N 8,519 

C 

2006 

193,000 

16. Village Manchester 

Southwest corner Manchester and 

Inglewood Aves 

N 7,166 

Total 1,572,788 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc 

Shopping Center Directory-West 2003 

National Research Bureau 

a C = Community (100,000 to 300,000 sf) N = Neighborhood (30,000 to 100,000 sf) 

R = Regional (300,000 to > 1,000,000 sf) SR = Super Regional (> 1,000,000 sf) 

Target 

Home Depot 

Gigante 

Staples 

Sav-on Drugs 

Kragen Auto Parts 

Bed, Bath & Beyond 

Ross 

Marshalls 

111,000 

130,000 

90,000 

20,300 

25,000 

15,000 

38,000 

33,650 

33,600 

Retail Market Lease and Vacancy Rates: 2006 

• As shown in Table 2.3-23, retail lease rates in the City of Inglewood currently range 

from $0.92 - $3.00 per square foot (NNN) depending on location and size of retail 

space. 


2.3-35


• In 2006, the City had an estimated total vacancy of about 67,363 sq.ft or 4.3 

percent of the total retail center inventory. 

• The largest vacant retail space of 40,608 sq.ft was found in the Crenshaw Imperial 

Shopping Center. 

Table 2.3-23 City of Inglewood Retail Market Lease and Vacancy Rates: 2006 

Shopping Center Name/Location Rates/SF/Month NNN a Vacant SF Total SF Vacancy Rate 

1 Airport Plaza Not Available 6,422 23,523 27.30% 

2 Century Hawthorne Not Available 0 12,407 0.00% 

3 Century Plaza Not Available 0 210,000 0.00% 

4 Century Square $2.05 0 16,309 0.00% 

5 

Crenshaw Imperial Shopping 

Center 

$1.50–$2.25 8,709 152,360 5.70% 

6 Crenshaw Imperial Plaza $1.25–$2.25 40,608 215,034 18.90% 

7 Food 4 Less Not Available 0 109,014 0.00% 

8 Hollywood Park Plaza Not Available 2,702 30,212 8.90% 

9 Hollywood Park Marketplace Not Available 0 435,000 0.00% 

10 Inglewood Center Not Available 6,083 102,276 5.90% 

11 La Brea Plaza $1.25–$2.37 2,839 45,100 6.30% 

12 Manchester Business Park Not Available 0 8,352 0.00% 

13 Manchester Plaza Not Available 0 4,516 0.00% 

14 Unnamed Shopping Center Not Available 0 8,519 0.00% 

15 The Village at Century b $0.92–$3.00 0 193,000 0.00% 

16 Village Manchester Not Available 0 7,166 0.00% 

Total 67,363 1,572,788 4.30% 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates 

a Triple net ("NNN") rental rate assumes that tenant pays their share of operating expenses, such as property 

taxes, utilities and maintenance and insurance 

b The Village at Century project has just been completed and businesses are starting to open. Businesses that have 

not opened are not included under vacancies 

Real Estate Trends 

Building Activity 

Nonresidential Building Activity 

• Table 2.3-24 and Figure 2.3-16 show non-residential building activity trends in the 

City of Inglewood from 1994 to 2004 based on the data provided by the 

Construction Industry Research Board. 

• As shown in constant 2006 dollars, nearly all of the building activity permitted in 

terms of valuation over this time period was commercial, which averaged 99.8 

percent of the total valuation annually compared to just 0.2 percent for industrial 

valuation. 

• As shown in Figure 2.3-16, industrial building activity only occurred in 1999 and 

the valuation for this industrial building was quite small, only $189,000. 

• The valuation for new commercial buildings displayed significant fluctuation over 

the 10 year time period. The valuation (in constant 2006 dollars) for new 

2.3-36 



commercial buildings ranged from just $612,000 in 1995 to about 28.3 million in 

2003. 

Table 2.3-24 

City of Inglewood Non-Residential Building Permit Valuations: 

1994–2004 (in thousands of constant 2006 dollars) 

Year Commercial % of Total Industrial % of Total Total Units 

1994 $1,963 100.00 $0 0.00 $1,963 

1995 612 100.00 0 0.00 612 

1996 1,674 100.00 0 0.00 1,674 

1997 704 100.00 0 0.00 704 

1998 1,994 100.00 0 0.00 1,994 

1999 11,572 98.40 189 1.60 11,761 

2000 17,855 100.00 0 0.00 17,855 

2001 1,370 100.00 0 0.00 1,370 

2002 3,659 100.00 0 0.00 3,659 

2003 28,331 100.00 0 0.00 28,331 

2004 $8,898 100.00 $0 0.00 $8,898 

Annual Average $7,148 99.80 $17 0.20 $7,166 


Construction Industry Research Board 

$30,000 

$25,000 

$20,000 

$15,000 

$10,000 

$5,000 

$0 

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Figure 2.3-16 City of Inglewood Non-Residential Building Activity: 1994-2004 

(in thousands of constant 2006 dollars) 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc., Construction Industry Research Board, 2005. 


2.3-37


Residential Building Activity 

• Table 2.3-25 and Figure 2.3-17 show residential building activity from 1994 to 2004 

in the City of Inglewood based on the data provided by the Construction Industry 

Research Board. Over this time period, a total of 346 housing units were permitted. 

Only 37.9 percent of total units permitted were single-family residences while 62.1 

percent were multi-family units. 

• The data indicates that on an average, 31 new residential units were permitted every 

year, of which 12 were single-family units and 20 were multi-family units. However, 

at least 200 more units have been added to the housing stock since 2004. 

• As shown in Table 2.3-25, on average from 1994 to 2004, there were more multifamily 

units than multi-family units permitted. As shown in Figure 2.3-17, the 

permitting of new units fluctuated over this period. 

Table 2.3-25 Inglewood New Residential 

Building Activity: 1994 to 2004 


Year Single- Family % of Total Multi- Family % of Total Total Units 

1994 6 100.0 0 0.0 6 

1995 9 36.0 16 64.0 25 

1996 9 60.0 6 40.0 15 

1997 2 5.6 34 94.4 36 

1998 6 16.2 31 83.8 37 

1999 23 92.0 2 8.0 25 

2000 13 59.1 9 40.9 22 

2001 3 3.0 97 97.0 100 

2002 22 84.6 4 15.4 26 

2003 9 42.9 12 57.1 21 

2004 29 87.9 4 12.1 33 

Total 131 215 346 

Annual Average 12 37.9 20 62.1 31 

SOURCE: 


Construction Industry Research Board 

2.3-38 



120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Single- Family 

Multi- Family 

Figure 2.3-17 City of Inglewood Residential Building Activity: 1995 to 2005 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc., Construction Industry Research Board, 2005. 

Housing Value 

Single Family Residential 

• As shown in Table 2.3-26, according to DataQuick the median price of a singlefamily 

residence sold in the City of Inglewood in February, 2006 was $475,000. 

• In comparison, the median price of a single-family residence sold in the South Bay 

Cities was significantly higher at $795,000, and $525,000 in the County. 

• Within the South Bay, the City of Manhattan Beach had the highest single-family 

residence median sales price at $1.95 million. 

Condominiums 

• As shown in Table 2.3-27, the median price of a condominium sold in the City of 

Inglewood in February, 2006 was around $330,000. 

• In comparison, the median condominium sales price in the South Bay Cities was 

estimated significantly higher at about $500,000, and in the County at $407,000. 

• Within the South Bay, the City of Hermosa Beach had the highest median sales 

price for condominiums at $1.12 million. 


2.3-39


Table 2.3-26 

City of Inglewood, South Bay Cities, and Los Angeles County 

Single-Family Median Sales Price: February 2006 

Single-Family Residences 

ZIP Code No. Sold Price ('000s) % change a 

Inglewood 90301 3 $470 17.4 

Inglewood 90302 8 458 26.2 




Inglewood Subtotal 21 $475 n/a 

Carson 90745 21 $500 17.1 

Carson 90746 10 540 22.6 

El Segundo 90245 4 920 26.5 

Gardena 90247 10 449 16.8 

Gardena 90248 2 464 14.1 

Gardena 90249 12 510 18.3 

Hawthorne 90250 22 538 13.8 

Hermosa Beach 90254 4 970 -2.1 

Lawndale 90260 8 580 27.8 

Lomita 90717 6 549 -1.5 

Manhattan Beach 90266 22 1,950 23.8 

Palos Verdes Estates b 90274 15 1,375 11.7 

Rancho Palos Verdes 90275 11 1,100 14.3 

Redondo Beach 90277 10 1,000 23.5 

Redondo Beach 90278 17 731 2.0 

Torrance 90501 15 555 13.3 

Torrance 90502 7 540 25.0 

Torrance 90503 13 758 15.8 

Torrance 90504 9 615 8.1 

Torrance 90505 12 775 3.5 

South Bay Cities Total 

(including Inglewood) 

251 $795 n/a 

Los Angeles County 4,299 $525 19.3 


DataQuick Datanews, February 2006 

a Indicates percent change from February 2005. 

b Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Estates fall within ZIP code 90274. 

2.3-40 



Table 2.3-27 


Median Value for Condominiums: February 2006 

Condominiums 

ZIP Code No. Sold Price ('000s) % change a 

Inglewood 90301 4 $308 21.2 


Inglewood 90303 n/a n/a n/a 



Inglewood Subtotal 19 $330 n/a 

Carson 90745 10 340 55.4 

Carson 90746 n/a n/a n/a 

El Segundo 90245 6 465 10.3 

Gardena 90247 6 390 42.3 

Gardena 90248 n/a n/a n/a 

Gardena 90249 1 365 52.4 

Hawthorne 90250 5 373 49.2 

Hermosa Beach 90254 4 1120 39.1 

Lawndale 90260 5 370 -17.5 

Lomita 90717 3 337 -34.8 

Manhattan Beach 90266 3 850 -35.7 

Palos Verdes Estates b 90274 n/a n/a n/a 

Rancho Palos Verdes 90275 3 583 33.1 

Redondo Beach 90277 9 600 -6.1 

Redondo Beach 90278 16 655 6.4 

Torrance 90501 6 538 26.5 

Torrance 90502 6 331 6.9 

Torrance 90503 6 675 32.6 

Torrance 90504 2 477 9.2 

Torrance 90505 6 534 22.1 

South Bay Cities Total 


116 $500 n/a 

Los Angeles County 1,107 407 15.6 


DataQuick Datanews, February 2006 

a Indicates percent change from February 2005. 

b Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Estates fall within the zip code 90274. 


2.3-41


Multi-Family Rental Market 

• As shown in Figure 2.3-18, according to the 2000 Census, the median monthly 

contract rent (in nominal dollars) for the City of Inglewood was $613. This was 

slightly lower than the median contract rent for Los Angeles County at $643. 

• The median contract rent in 2006 dollars is estimated to be $751 for Inglewood, 

and $788 for the County. 

$900 

$800 

$751 

$788 

$700 

$600 

$613 

$643 

$500 

$400 

$300 


Los Angeles 

2000 2006 

Figure 2.3-18 Comparative Median Contract Rent: 2000 and 2006 1 

SOURCE: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. 

1 The 2006 Median Contract Rent was estimated by inflating the Census 2000 median contract rent using the 

Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or a factor of 1.25 

• Locational and Economic Opportunities 

The following chapter presents the key locational and economic opportunities in the City 

of Inglewood that could provide impetus to the economy of Inglewood. These include 

opportunities arising from proximity to LAX, tourism and lodging industry, and the 

redevelopment of the Hollywood Park, the Forum and the Downtown area. 

Los Angeles International Airport 

• The passenger volume at LAX is projected to increase from just over 60 million air 

passengers (MAPs) in 2004 to 78.0 MAP in 2030. Most of the additional passenger 

volume is projected to be handled by other airports in the region such as Ontario 

and Palmdale. 

• The air cargo volume at LAX is projected to increase from 2.0 million tons in 2003 

to 2.3 million tons in 2030. Most of the growth in air cargo is expected to be 

handled by other regional airports. 

2.3-42 



• The environmental analysis of the LAX Master Plan 2000 Draft EIS/EIR resulted 

in the formulation of Alternative D that was presented and evaluated in the 2003 

LAX Master Plan Addendum and 2003 Supplement to the Draft EIS/EIR. 

• Alternative D was a new alternative in response to public comment on Master Plan 

Alternatives A,B,C and the No Action/No Project Alternative. 

• Alternative D was developed to offer a regional airport development alternative for 

LAX. It would be designed to serve approximately 78 million annual passengers 

which is similar to the activity level identified in the scenario adopted by SCAG for 

LAX. It would encourage other airports in the region to develop facilities to 

accommodate regional demand beyond the level served at LAX. 

• Alternative D is intended to respond to increased security threats with the objective 

of providing a facility that can continue to operate under the highest security levels 

with minimal impacts to the passenger processing experience. 

• The ground access network would be redeveloped to limit vehicle access to the 

central terminal area (CTA) and to remove vehicle parking from the area. The CTA 

would be accessed via the Landside Automated People Mover (APM) system. 

• Some of the other components of Alternative D include: four new passenger 

terminals, new aircraft rescue and firefighting facilities, parallel taxiways between 

the runways on the north and south airfields to reduce the potential for runway 

incursions and airfield reconfigurations to provide unrestricted movement for New 

Large Aircraft (NLA). Alternative D also includes a new Ground Transportation 

Center (GTC) to improve the landside level of service at LAX, a Consolidated 

Rental Car Facility and an Intermodal Transportation Center. 

• The LAX Master Plan Stipulated Settlement was approved by Mayor Villaraigosa 

and the Los Angeles City Council in early 2006 resulting in an historic settlement of 

lawsuits filed against the LAX Master Plan. It was also approved by other cities 

including the City of Inglewood. 

• The settlement allows LAWA to begin construction on the LAX South Airfield 

Improvement Project and to develop new plans for LAX consistent with the 

Mayor’s vision for the regional redistribution of aviation demand. 

• The settlement will create a community-based planning process to revisit and 

potentially replace controversial “yellow light” projects such as the Manchester 

Square Ground Transportation Center. 

Tourism and Lodging 

• The majority of the hotels and motels in Inglewood serve tourists and business 

travelers from Los Angeles International Airport. 

• The hotels and motels are primarily located along Century Boulevard, as well as 

Manchester Avenue and the Imperial Highway. 

• As shown in Table 2.3-28, the City of Inglewood generated about $1.84 million in 

transient occupancy tax revenue for 2002-2003. Of the South Bay Cities, Torrance 

generated the most amount of transient occupancy tax revenue with about $5.52 

million. 


2.3-43


Table 2.3-28 

City of Inglewood and South Bay Cities 

Transient Occupancy Tax Revenues: 2002–2003 

Revenue 

% of South Bay Cities 

Inglewood $1,835,682 10.1 

Carson 804,397 4.4 

El Segundo 2,866,811 15.8 

Gardena 475,298 2.6 

Hawthorne 929,673 5.1 

Hermosa Beach 1,054,272 5.8 

Lawndale 297,339 1.6 

Lomita 100,792 0.6 

Manhattan Beach 2,040,428 11.2 

Palos Verdes Estates 0 0.0 

Rancho Palos Verdes 15,508 0.1 

Redondo Beach 2,257,526 12.4 

Rolling Hills 0 0.0 

Rolling Hills Estates 0 0.0 

Torrance $5,523,329 30.3 

Total South Bay Cities $18,201,055 100.0 

SOURCES: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.; California State Controller 

The transient occupancy tax for the City of Los Angeles is excluded because it is reported as an 

aggregate for the City and not by sub-area, such as along Century Blvd. leading into LAX. 

Hollywood Park 

• The Hollywood Park Race Track is situated on 240 acres of land just 3 miles east of 

the Los Angeles International Airport. 

• In July 2005, Churchill Downs sold the Hollywood Park Race Track to the Bay 

Meadows Land Company for $260 million. 

• Under the terms of the deal, the Bay Meadows Land Company will continue 

thoroughbred racing at the track for at least three more years. 

• After this three year guarantee, the continuation of Hollywood Park as a racing 

venue depends on California allowing the addition of alternative forms of 

gambling, such as slot machines, to the track. 

• In 2001, Hollywood Park Inc. sold 42 acres of underutilized land for the 

construction of a retail center that includes Target, Home Depot and Gigante 

Market. 

• The City of Inglewood is expected to work closely with the Bay Meadows Land 

Company to secure community and stakeholder input and ideas on various 

elements of the master planning process for the redevelopment of the Hollywood 

Park property. 

The Forum 

• The Forum is located at the southeast corner of Manchester Boulevard and Prairie 

Avenue. It can hold approximately 18,000 people for concerts and services. 

• Since professional sports teams such as the Los Angeles Kings, the Los Angeles 

Lakers, and the Sparks have moved out of the Forum, the site has continued to be 

2.3-44 



used for large concerts and weekly church services, but has lost its position within 

Los Angeles as the premiere entertainment venue. 

• The Forum, which is currently under the ownership of the Faithful Central Bible 

Church, is exploring the idea of using its underutilized parking area for housing and 

retail development. 

Downtown 

• Within the downtown area, there is an increased focus on economic development 

and mixed use development. It is the City’s hope to have a vibrant downtown, 

centering on Market Street, that has commercial, residential, business, 

governmental and entertainment uses. 

• For the future, a Business Improvement District (BID) is being considered to 

revitalize the downtown business environment. 

The following presents the key demographic and economic findings and trends in the 

City of Inglewood and surrounding area, including: demographic trends; residential 

trends; employment trends; growth projections and market conditions and trends. 

• Issues 

• The City’s existing employment base, with one-third of all jobs in the services 

sector, has the effect of lowering the average wage of local employment 

opportunities. 

• The City’s population age, 25 years and older, has achieved markedly lower levels 

of higher education than the total for the South Bay Cities and Los Angeles 

County. 

• The City is currently witnessing leakage in most of its retail categories, with only 

General Merchandise performing above the Los Angeles County per capita average 

retail sales. 

• In 2004, the unemployment rate in Inglewood was the second highest among the 

South Bay Cities at 8.3 percent, compared to 6.6 percent for Los Angeles County. 

• Manufacturing declined by 31.9 percent from an estimated 2,685 jobs in 2001 to 

1829 jobs in 2004. 

• The annual average salary in the City of Inglewood declined by 4.5 percent in 

constant 2005 dollars from $42,683 to $40,773 from 2001 to 2004. 

• Per capita taxable retail sales in Inglewood were relatively low at $5,998 amongst 

the cities in the South Bay; about 67 percent of the $8,980 area average. 

• The City is generally lacking in strong regional retail centers. 

• The City is currently lacking in job training and workforce development programs. 


California State Board of Equalization. Taxable sales data for the City of Inglewood, 

annual data for 1994 and 2004. 

California Department of Finance, 2005. Economic and demographic data. 


2.3-45


Construction Industry Research Board, 1995- 2005. Building activity data for the City of 

Inglewood. 

Kosmont Partners, 2003. Inglewood Economic Development Opportunities Assessment Report, 

Volume I. February. 

National Research Bureau, 2003. Shopping Center Directory Published literature 

regarding retail activity. 

Southern California Association of Governments, 2004. Regioanl Transportation Plan. 

Population, Household and Employment projections for 2000–2030. 

United States Bureau of the Census, 1990 and 2000. Economic and demographic data 

Urban Land Institute, 2004. Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers. 

Wilbur Smith Associates, in Association with USC Center for Economic Development 

2005. City of Inglewood Citywide Economic Development Strategic Plan, January. 

2.3-46 


CHAPTER 3 

Infrastructure 

This chapter provides information on existing infrastructure within the City. This Chapter 

includes the following sections: 

• Water System 

• Sewer-Wastewater 

• Storm Drainage 

• Solid Waste 

• Electricity 

• Natural Gas 

• Telecommunications 

• Circulation 

3.1 WATER SYSTEM 

This section discusses the existing potable water system in the City of Inglewood and 

provides information on recycled water. Information for this section is based on the City 

of Inglewood, 2003 Water Master Plan, 2005 Urban Water Management Plan, and 

conversations with the service providers—Cal-America Water Company, Golden State 

Water Company and City of Inglewood. 


The City of Inglewood provides water to 86 percent of the residences and businesses 

within the City. Water is provided in the remaining areas by Golden State Water 

Company and Cal America Water. The Cal-America Water Company serves a small area 

in the northwest area portion of the City. The Golden State Water Company, formerly 

Southern California Water Co., provides water to a significant area located south of 

Century Boulevard to the City’s boundary. 18 The City purchases approximately 55 percent 

of its water from West Basin Municipal Water District (WBMWD) and pumps 

approximately 45 percent from the City’s local groundwater basin. The water provided by 

the City is pumped from City-owned wells, treated, and blended with water purchased 

from the West Basin Municipal Water District (WBMWD). Figure 3.1-1 illustrates the 

service boundaries of each provider in the City of Inglewood. 

Water Service Providers 


The City of Inglewood purchases approximately 55 percent of its water supplies from the 

WBMWD. As a member of the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern 

California, WBMWD purchases potable water imported from the Colorado River from 

MWD on a wholesale basis, and the State Water Project for sale to local retail water 

18 Final Report, 2005 Urban Water Management Plan, City of Inglewood, December 2005 


3.1-1

Chapter 3 Infrastructure 

agencies. The imported water is provided, in part to supplement the existing groundwater 

supplies in all areas of the WBMWD, and to provide a barrier through injection wells, to 

seawater intrusion into the West Coast Basin. 

West Basin Municipal Water District 

The West Basin Municipal Water District (WBMWD) was formed in 1947 to distribute 

imported water from the Colorado River. The WBMWD was annexed to the 

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California in 1948. It has been distributing water 

from the Colorado River since 1948 and from the State Water Project since 1974. 

Cal-America Water Company 

Cal-America Company provides service to roughly five percent of the City in an area that 

is located in the northwest corner of Inglewood. 

Golden State Water Company 

The City has six emergency connections to the Golden Water State Co. and two 

connections to City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. These 

interconnections are not primary sources of the city’s water supply. 

Water Infrastructure 

Inglewood is predominantly a residential community, bordered by the City of Hawthorne 

to the south, and to the east, north and west by portions of unincorporated Los Angeles 

County and the City of Los Angeles. 

The City’s water service area covers approximately 4,600 acres within the City’s 

boundaries. Water is provided by the City’s system to roughly 86 percent of the 

residences and businesses in the City. 19 In 2005, the City’s water service area included a 

population of approximately 98,714 residents through 14,818 connections However, 

based on zoning designations, approximately 18,265 residents 20 in the City receive water 

service from other agencies. The City’s water distribution system consists of 808,000 feet 

(152 miles) of pipe, ranging in size from 3 inches to 30 inches in diameter. The service 

area is divided into three distinct pressure zones because of the elevation differences that 

vary from 60 to 247 feet above mean sea level. 

In general, the City’s domestic water system consists of the following. 21 

• 152 miles of pipe, three active wells, water treatment plant 

• Two forebay reservoirs— North Inglewood and Morningside 

• Two booster pump stations—North Inglewood facility; and at Morningside facility 

two imported water supply connections 

19 City of Inglewood, Water Master Plan, 2003, Executive Summary, AKM Consulting Engineers 

20 City of Inglewood, Water Master Plan, 2003, Executive Summary, AKM Consulting Engineers, pp 3-10. 

21 City of Inglewood, Water Master Plan, 2003. 

3.1-2 




WATER SERVICE AREAS 




Not to Scale 

Figure 3.1-1

3.1 Water System 

• Eight emergency connections (two with City of Los Angeles Department of Public 

Works, six with Southern California Water Company) 

• 14,818 domestic water services, 16 recycled water service connections, 

• 198 backflow prevention devices 

• 1,540 hydrants, 2,600 gate valves, and 1,250 backflow prevention devices for 

internal protection 

The City’s service area is divided into three distinct pressure zones because of the 

elevation differences. Zone 1 is located at the southernmost part of the city. Zone is 

bounded by Imperial Highway to the north, Crenshaw Boulevard to the west, Century 

Freeway to the south and Yukon Avenue to the east. Zone 2 is located generally between 

Centinela Avenue and Century Boulevard west of Prairie Avenue and includes 

Hollywood Park. Zone 3 covers the remaining northern and eastern parts of the City. 

According to the City of Inglewood’s database of July 6, 2004, there are 14,505 active 

water meters in its water distribution system. The metered accounts are divided into five 

water code classifications, as follows: residential (A), commercial (B), Industrial (C), 

Municipal (D), and Fire Service (E). Small meters (those sized at two inches or smaller) 

account for roughly 96.7 percent of the total, and generate 82.2 percent of the total 

revenue, while large meters account only 3.3 percent but generate 17.8 percent of the 

revenue. Based on Inglewood’s database for active meters, small meters total 14,032 and 

large meters total 226. 

The City maintains three pumping stations with a total of 24 separate pumps and three 

reservoirs ranging in capacity from 1 million gallons to 16 million gallons of water with an 

overall storage capacity of 21.6 million gallons of water. 

The City of Inglewood system consists of three closed pressure zones. Normally, the 

pressure is maintained by the available pressure at the two imported water connections, 

and pumping at the Effluent Pump Station. These pump stations take suction from the 

City’s reservoirs, and pump into two closed zones. The two storage reservoirs act as 

forebay for the booster pump stations. 

Reservoirs 

The City has two reservoirs that act as forebay storage for the booster pump stations. 

Each reservoir is about 18 feet to 20 feet deep, but the reservoir levels are maintained 

below 3.5 feet to ensure circulation and maintain adequate disinfectant residuals in the 

system. The North Inglewood Reservoir was constructed in 1974. It is a covered 

underground reservoir 144 feet wide and 221 feet long. Its total capacity is 4.6 million 

gallons. The reservoir level is currently operated between 1.0 and 3.5 feet. The 

Morningside Reservoir was constructed in 1954, and has a total capacity of 16 million 

gallons. The reservoir level is currently operated between 0.5 and 2.5 feet. 


3.1-5


Groundwater 

The City has access to groundwater in the West Coast Groundwater Basin and imported 

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) supplies through the West 

Basin Municipal Water District (WBMWD). 22 

The City’s water system has two MWD connections: WB-17 and WB-38. Since 1995, an 

average of 6,400 acres feet per year (AF/year) has been purchased from MWD. The City 

has not been restricted in the amount of water it takes from MWD. The minimum 

required at each connection is 1 cubic foot per second (cfs). The imported water use is 

adjusted based on demand and is typically mixed with treated well water before entering 

the system. 

West Coast Groundwater Basin 

The City of Inglewood has three active wells (Wells 1, 2, and 4) that extract water from 

the West Coast Groundwater Basin. The West Coast Groundwater Basin underlies the 

southwestern portion of the Los Angeles Coastal Plain. The city has adjudicated rights to 

4, 49.89 acre-feet of groundwater per year. This total does not include leased water or 

carryover water from previous years. On average, the City pumps 5,600 acre-feet per year 

from the West Coast Groundwater Basin. The capacity of wells has declined significantly 

over the years. 

• The capacity at Well 1 has decreased from 3,000 gallons per minute (gpm) to about 

900 gpm. 

• The capacity at Well 2 has decreased from 3,000 gpm to about 1,000 gpm 

• The capacity at Well 3 has decreased from 2,500 gpm to about 1,550 gpm. 

In addition, the City plans to increase the groundwater supply with two additional wells. 

Well 5 is constructed but currently not on-line. The expected capacity is 1,750 gpm. 

Well 6 is currently under construction. Its anticipated capacity is 2,000 gpm 

The raw well water is conveyed directly to the City’s treatment plant (Sanford M 

Anderson Treatment Plant) via a 12 inch to 27-inch diameter raw well water transmission 

main. 

Water Treatment 

Groundwater Treatment 

The City of Inglewood’s treatment plant has a capacity to treat 8.5 million gallons per day 

(gpd) of groundwater. In order to provide an adequate amount of water, the city operates 

four wells that extract local groundwater from the West Coast Basin and treat it at the 

treatment plant. 


3.1-6 



The Sanford M. Anderson Treatment Plant (Anderson Treatment Plant), a three acre site, 

is located on the southwest corner of Eucalyptus Avenue and Beach Avenue, within the 

City, and was constructed to treat the City’s groundwater for iron and manganese. 

Currently, the Anderson Treatment Plant has a capacity of 8.64 million gpd and a 

clearwell capacity of 834,000 gallons. The treated water is then pumped from the 

treatment plant to the North Inglewood and Morningside facilities. The raw well water is 

conveyed directly to the City’s treatment plant (Sanford M Anderson Treatment Plant) via 

a 12-inch to 27-inch diameter raw well water transmission main. 

Water Demand and Supply 

The City of Inglewood’s historic water production was established from records of well 

production and purchased imported water from two Metropolitan Water District 

connections. 

The annual water purchase and well production over the last seven years has averaged a 

total of 12096.44 AF/year. The City pumped an annual average of 5,601 AF of local 

groundwater and imported 6,394 AF of MWD water over the last seven fiscal years. 23 The 

percentage of the total water supply that was provided by groundwater averages 

approximately 43 percent per year. About 57 percent of the total water supply was 

provided by imported water from MWD. 

Demand variations through a year are influenced by seasonal effects. Peak and low 

monthly consumption occur during the dry summer months and wet winter months. 

Peak demands occur in June and August, and the 2001-2002 monthly water demands 

were 1046.10 AF in June, and 1118.43 in August 01-02. Low demands occur in February, 

with a monthly water demand of 757.67. 24 The highest and lowest demand factors are 

1.31 and 0.57 respectively. 

In FY 2004–2005 the City had an available supply of 11,751.45 AF from groundwater 

and purchased water. Projected water supplies to 2030 are derived from the adjudicated 

water rights, the 18 year averages for carryovers, net leases/exchanges and purchased 

water. Table 3.1-1 refers to the current and projected supply though 2030. The one factor 

that is constant throughout the period is the adjudicated water rights – the city produced 

groundwater, of 4449.89 AF/year. 

23 City of Inglewood, Water Master Plan, 2003, Executive Summary, AKM Consulting Engineers, pp5-1 

24 Ibid., pp5-2. 


3.1-7


Table 3.1-1 

Current and projected Water Supplies (AF/YR) 

Water supply sources 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 

City produced groundwater 4,450 4,450 4,450 4,450 4,450 4,450 

Purchased from wholesaler 

WBMWD 

6290 8500 8500 8500 8500 8500 

Recycled water 654 670 670 670 670 670 

Carryovers/net leases & 

Exchanges 

946 933 933 933 933 933 

Total 12340 14553 14553 14553 14553 14553 

Water Consumption and Water Production 

The City produces and purchases more water per year than is measured by the meters. An 

average of 92 percent of water produced and purchased each year was used by the 

consumers. Approximately eight percent of the water supply is unaccounted for each 

year. 

Water Conservation 

In 1990, the City had adopted a voluntary program that encouraged a 10 percent 

reduction in water usage. Similarly, a few years later, in 1991, the City of Inglewood 

adopted two water conservation Ordinances: 1) Ordinance No. 91-6 (Water Conservation 

Practices) and 2) Ordinance No. [X] (Water Efficiency in the Landscape). 

Recycled Water Use 

The City of Inglewood has 16 connections to the West Basin Municipal Water District’s 

recycled water system, which utilizes approximately 700 acre feet per year 25 . The City has 

a recycled water use program and as been purchasing recycled water from WBMWD 

Water Recycling Plant, located in El Segundo, since 1995. 

Current demand for recycled water is low, and is primarily only used for irrigation 

purposes. Presently, approximately 655 AF/year are delivered to industrial, municipal and 

school district facilities for the irrigation of landscape and other non-potable uses. The 

City has 14 connections to the West Basin’s recycled water system and serves the 

Cemetery, Hollywood Park Race Track, City Parks, School District, and Caltrans Right of 

way. Table 3.1-2 provides recycled water use for the ten years. 


3.1-8 



Table 3.1-2 

AF/year 

FY 94/95 2.62 

FY 95/96 243.2 

FY 96/97 707.91 

FY 97/98 516.2 

FY 98/99 545.2 

FY 99/00 727.90 

FY 00/01 645.89 

FY 01/02 737.3 

FY 02/03 607.1 

FY 03/04 705.34 

FY 04/05 654.16 

Total 6092.90 



Federal 

Clean Water Act 

The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes regulatory requirements for potable water 

supplies including raw and treated water quality criteria. The City of Inglewood would be 

required to monitor water quality and conform to the regulatory requirements of the 

CWA. 

Safe Drinking Water Act 

The federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) established standards for contaminants in 

drinking water supplies. Maximum levels and/or treatment techniques were established 

for each of the contaminants, including: metals, nitrates, asbestos, total dissolved solids, 

and microbes. 

State 

Safe Drinking Water Act (1976) 

California enacted its own Safe Drinking Water Act. The California Department of Health 

Services (DHS) has been granted primary enforcement responsibility for the SDWA. 

Title 22 of the California Administrative Code establishes DHS authority and stipulates 

drinking water quality and monitoring standards. These standards are equal to or more 

stringent than federal standards. 

The Urban Water Management Planning Act (UWMPA) was also developed due to concerns 

for potential water supply shortages throughout the state of California. It requires 

information on water supply reliability and water use efficiency measures. Urban water 


3.1-9


suppliers are required, as part of the Act, to develop and implement plans to describe 

their efforts to promote efficient use and management of water resources. 26 

Recycled Water Regulations 

Within the State of California, recycled water is regulated by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), the State Water Resources Control Board, Regional Water 

Quality Control Boards, and CDHS. The State Water Resources Control Board has 

adopted Resolution No. 77-1, Policy with Respect to Water Reclamation in California. 

This policy states that the State Board and Regional Boards will encourage and consider 

or recommend for funding water reclamation projects that do not impair water rights or 

beneficial instream uses. The CDHS establishes the recycled water uses allowed in the 

State, and designates the level of treatment (i.e., undisinfected secondary, disinfected 

secondary, or disinfected tertiary) required for each of these designated uses (Title 22, 

California Code of Regulations). 

The Regional Water Quality Control Boards implement the State Board’s Guidelines for 

Regulation of Water Reclamation and issue waste discharge permits that serve to regulate 

the quality of recycled water based on stringent water quality requirements. The CDHS 

develops policies protecting human health and comments and advises on Regional Water 

Quality Control Board permits. 

Title 22 

The California Water Code requires the CDHS to establish water reclamation criteria. In 

1975, the CDHS prepared Title 22 to fulfill this requirement. Title 22 regulates 

production and use of reclaimed water in California by establishing three categories of 

reclaimed water: primary effluent, which typically includes grit removal and initial 

sedimentation or settling tanks; adequately disinfected, oxidized effluent (secondary 

effluent) which typically involves aeration and additional settling basins; and adequately 

disinfected, oxidized, coagulated, clarified, filtered effluent (tertiary effluent) which 

typically involves filtration and chlorination. In addition to defining reclaimed water uses, 

Title 22 also defines requirements for sampling and analysis of effluent and requires 

specific design requirements for facilities. 

Local 

City of Inglewood Municipal Code 

Section 5-112 (Water Efficiency in the Landscape) of the City’s Municipal Code 

establishes procedures and standards for the design, installation, and maintenance of 

water-efficient landscapes in conjunction with new construction projects within the City. 

26 Urban Water Management Planning Act (California Water Code, Division 6, Part 2.6, Section 10610 et 

seq.) 

3.1-10 



This section promotes the conservation and efficient use of water within the City in order 

to prevent the waste of water resources. 

• Issues 

• Retrofitting of Water Meters: City of Inglewood requires the replacing its water 

meters on all active accounts, including those for Municipal accounts (but exclude 

Fire Service meters). 27 The effect of this project will be an increase in billable water 

consumption, thereby allowing the City of Inglewood to charge for water which is 

although being consumed, but has not been paid for. 


City of Inglewood, 2005. Urban Water Management Plan. December. 

City of Inglewood, 2003. Water Master Plan. 

Johnsons Control, 2004. Detailed Facility Improvement Measure Description, FIM 1 Water Meter 

Retrofit. 24 September. 

27 Johnson Controls, Draft publication, (9/24/2004) Detailed Facility Improvement Measure Description, 

FIM 1 Water Meter Retrofit. 24 September. This draft provides a detailed facility improvement measure 

description. 


3.1-11

3.2 Sewer and Wastewater 

3.2 SEWER AND WASTEWATER 

This section describes the existing sewer and wastewater system in the City of Inglewood. 

Information for this section was obtained from the City’s 2003 Water Master Plan, the 

City’s 2005 Urban Water Management Plan and discussions with service providers— 

Inglewood, and Los Angeles County Sanitation District. 


Service Providers 

Most cities have complex systems of sewer lines feeding into larger lines to move raw 

sewage to a regional treatment facility. Some cities also have agreements for treatment 

with other local providers. Sewer and wastewater service within the City of Inglewood is 

provided by the City and the Los Angeles County Sanitation District (LACSD). Similar to 

the boundaries of the City’s potable water system, LACSD provides sewer service for the 

entire City, a service area of approximately 8.9 gross square miles, as illustrated in 

Figure 3.2-1. 

LACSD boundaries encompass nearly 85,019 acres, and contains 155 miles of sewer 

mains in the City of Inglewood, including 3,240 sewer manholes and 16,393 sewer lateral 

connections. LACSD has a total of 16,177 active refuse accounts in the City. 

Wastewater Collection and Treatment 

The Los Angeles County Sanitation District (LACSD) manages wastewater collection and 

treatment for the City of Inglewood. The wastewater from the City primarily flows to the 

Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (advanced primary with partial secondary treatment) 

located in the City of Carson. The wastewater flow from the City to the LACSD 

treatment facility estimated at 10.6 million gallons per day (mgd), of which approximately 

8.9 mgd is from the portion of the City served by the City’s water system. 28 LACSD is 

also responsible for monitoring industrial waste discharges into the wastewater system. 

Joint Water Pollution Control Plant 

The Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP) is located at 24501 S. Figueroa Street 

in Carson, California. The plant occupies approximately 350 acres to the east of the 

Harbor (110) Freeway. One hundred thirty five of the 350 acres are used as buffer areas 

between the operational areas and surrounding residential neighbors. These buffer areas 

include nursery operations, the Wilmington Boys and Girls Club, a fresh water marsh area 

and Kellogg’s Supply Inc. 

28 2005 Urban Water Management Plan, December 2005 


3.2-1


Operation 

The JWPCP is one of the largest wastewater treatment plants in the world and is the 

largest of LACSD’s wastewater treatment plants. The facility provides both primary and 

secondary treatment for approximately 320 million gallons of wastewater per day. Solids 

collected in primary and secondary treatment are processed in anaerobic digestion tanks 

where bacteria break down organic material and produce methane gas. After digestion, 

the solids are dewatered and hauled off site for use in composting, land application, or 

combined with municipal solid waste for co-disposal. Methane gas generated in the 

anaerobic digestion process is used to produce power and digester heating steam in a 

combined cycle power plant that utilizes gas turbines and waste-heat recovery steam 

generators. The on-site generation of power permits the JWPCP to be self-sufficient with 

respect to its energy requirements. The plant serves a population of approximately 

3.5 million people throughout Los Angeles County. Prior to discharge, the treated 

wastewater is disinfected with hypochlorite and sent to the Pacific Ocean through a 

network of outfalls. These outfalls extend two miles off the coast of Southern California 

into the Palos Verdes Peninsula to a depth of 200 feet. 29 

Water Treatment 

Wastewater treatment involves processes that, at minimum, remove solids to a level that 

meets regulatory water quality standards. The treatment processes include preliminary, 

primary, secondary, and tertiary phases, each of which removes progressively finer grains 

of solids. At the end of secondary treatment, most solids have been removed from the 

water. Tertiary treatment eliminates remaining impurities through filtration and 

disinfection. There are three wastewater treatment plants that serve the jurisdictions 

within the watershed. As mentioned above, JWPCP is operated by LACSD and occupies 

approximately 142 hectares (350 acres) to the east of the Harbor (110) Freeway. The 

JWPCP is the largest of the Districts' wastewater treatment plants, providing full 

secondary treatment for up to 400 million gallons of wastewater per day (mgd). 

The JWPCP serves communities throughout the entire South Bay, as well as communities 

as far east as Downey and as far north as Inglewood. The treated wastewater is 

disinfected with chlorine and sent to the Pacific Ocean through a network of outfalls that 

extends approximately three kilometers (two miles) off the Palos Verdes Peninsula to a 

depth of 200 feet. 


The City has a recycled water use program and has been purchasing recycled water from 

West Basin Municipal Water District [WBMWD] Water Recycling Plant, located in El 

Segundo, California since 1995. Approximately 655 af/year (acre-feet) are delivered to 

industrial, municipal, and school district facilities for the irrigation of landscape and other 

non-potable uses. 

29 http://www.lacsd.org/jwpcp/jwpcp.htm 

3.2-2 




SEWER INDEX 

Source: City of Inglewood, March 2006. 



Figure 3.2-1

3.2 Sewer and Wastewater 

The City of Los Angeles operates the Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant located near 

the West Basin’s service area. West Basin purchases effluent from the Hyperion 

Treatment Plant that has received secondary treatment. West Basin treats the effluent to a 

minimum of tertiary treatment and disinfection to meet State requirements. Rates for 

reclaimed water are low and are used primarily for irrigation purposes. The City has 14 

connections to the West Basin’s recycled water system and serves Inglewood Park 

Cemetery, Hollywood Park Race Track, City Parks, School District facilities, and Caltrans 

right of way. 


Federal Regulations 

National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits 

The NPDES permit system was established by the Clean Water Act (CWA) to regulate 

both point source discharges (a municipal or industrial discharge at a specific location or 

pipe) and nonpoint source discharges (diffuse runoff of water from adjacent land uses) to 

surface waters of the United States. For point source discharges, such as sewer outfalls, 

each NPDES permit contains limits on allowable concentrations and mass emissions of 

pollutants contained in the discharge. 

Disposal of Biosolids 

Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 503, Title 23 California Code of 

Regulations, and standards established by the CVRWQCB regulate the disposal of 

biosolids. 

• Issues 

• A Sewer Master Plan is currently being prepared by the City and will be available by 

the end of 2006. While no issues have been identified by this report, the Sewer 

Master Plan may identify specific issues related to the City’s sewer and wastewater 

systems. 


Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County. 2006. Website: www.lacsd.org, accessed 

March 31. 

Joint Water Pollution Control Plant. 2006. Website: 

http://www.lacsd.org/jwpcp/jwpcp.htm, accessed March 31. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. “Clean Water Act, Section 402: 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Website: 

http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/laws/section402.html, accessed March 31. 

City of Inglewood, Ordinance No. 93-20, Water Efficiency in the landscape. 


3.2-5


City of Inglewood, Urban Water Management Plan, December 2005 

City of Inglewood, Water Master Plan, September 2003. 

West Basin Municipal District, http://www.westbasin.org/ 

Urban Water Management Plan, http://www.westbasin.org/pdf/UWMP_2005.pdf 

3.2-6 


3.3 Storm Drains 

3.3 STORM DRAINS 

This section discusses the storm drain systems within the City of Inglewood. Information 

in this section is based on the City of Inglewood public works staff, Inglewood Municipal 

Code and 2005 Urban Water Management Plan. 


The City of Inglewood is situated on the upper portion of the local Dominguez 

watershed, and the lower portion of the Ballona Watershed, as shown in Figure 5.2-1 

(Watersheds) in Section 5.2 (Hydrology and Water Quality). As a result, the City is not in 

the path of any upstream runoff. Of the two types of flooding (riverine flooding and 

urban flooding), the City is affected by urban flooding. In addition, any low-lying area has 

the potential to flood. The flooding of developed areas may occur when the amount of 

water generated from rainfall and runoff exceeds a stormwater system’s capability to 

remove it. 

Winter Rainfall 

Over the last 125 years, the average annual rainfall in Los Angeles was 14.9 inches. The 

City of Inglewood is in the southwestern section of Los Angeles. It is up against the 

Rosecrans and Baldwin Hills, which increases the collection of rainwater. 

Storm Drain Facilities 

The City owns and maintains approximately 12 miles of reinforced concrete pipes and 

464 catch basins. The Los Angeles County Flood Control District operates roughly 

42 miles of storm drain pipes along with 889 catch basins within City limits, as shown in 

Figure 3.3-1. 

The City of Inglewood has a high concentration of impermeable surfaces that either 

collect water, or concentrate the flow of water in unnatural channels. During periods of 

urban flooding, streets can become swift moving rivers, and basements can fill with 

water. Storm drains can back up with vegetative debris causing additional, localized 

ponding or flooding. 

There are a variety of surface water management providers in the County that manage 

water quality and storm water runoff from new development. The City has an active 

program to implement the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System (NPDES). 

Flooding 

The City of Inglewood is susceptible to flooding from the confluence of storm run-off 

due to heavy rain. Flooding has occurred from the overflow of rain within the storm 

water system. Flooding has occurred along commercial streets that have disrupted traffic. 


3.3-1


There are a number of rivers in the Southern California region, but the river with the best 

recorded history is the Los Angeles River. The flood history of the Los Angeles River is 

generally indicative of the flood history of much of Southern California. While the City of 

Inglewood is ten miles to the southwest of downtown Los Angeles, it is not so far away 

as to not be affected by the heavy rains that bring flooding to Los Angeles. 

The Santa Monica, Santa Susana, and Vertigo mountains, which surround three sides of 

the valley, seldom reach heights above three thousand feet. The western San Gabriel 

Mountains, in contrast, have elevations of more than seven thousand feet. These higher 

ridges often trap eastern-moving winter storms. Although downtown Los Angeles 

averages just fifteen inches of rain a year, some mountain peaks in the San Gabriel’s 

receive more than forty inches of precipitation annually. 

The amount of paved roads and the geographic location of the city, adjacent to the 

Baldwin and Rosecrans Hills to the north and east, and the principal location of 

Inglewood within the coastal plain which slopes gently from the east to the southwest, 

prevent the City from flooding. However, it is important that the City’s storm water 

infrastructure is maintained in prime condition. 



National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

Established under the Clean Water Act, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) regulation protects receiving water quality through two primary objectives: (1) 

effectively prohibit non-storm water discharges to the storm drain system, and (2) 

reduces the discharge of pollutants to the storm drain system to the maximum extent 

practicable through the implementation of control measures called "best management 

practices" (BMPs). In California, federal and state NPDES regulations are enforced by 

the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and nine regional water quality 

control boards requiring certain facilities to file a Notice of Intent (NOI), and implement 

a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to control storm water pollutants 

(e.g., manufacture of asphalt, concrete, vitreous and steel products). The RWQCB has 

also issued a Los Angeles Countywide Municipal NPDES Permit which requires all cities 

in the County to implement a wide variety of activities under extensive programs to 

remove pollutants from storm water/urban runoff. As a Permittee under the Countywide 

NPDES Permit, the City of Inglewood adopted an ordinance to allow implementation of 

the programs required by the Permit codified in the Inglewood Municipal Code as Article 

15 of Chapter 9. 

3.3-2 




STORM DRAIN INDEX 

Source: City of Inglewood, March 2006. 



Figure 3.3-1


NPDES Permit Program—Phase II 

On August 7, 1995, EPA amended the NPDES permit application requirements in order 

to focus on Phase II storm water discharges, such as discharges caused by the following: 

• Commercial, light industrial and institutional activities 

• Construction activities under 5 acres 

• Municipal storm drain systems serving populations under 100,000 

Similar to Phase I requirements, the NPDES Phase II permit program also requires the 

development and implementation of storm water management plans to reduce such 

discharges. Affected agencies must apply for a NPDES Phase II permit by March 2003. 

General Construction Storm Water Permit 

Construction site storm water management is governed by the State Board under Water 

Quality Order 99-08-DWQ/NPDES General Permit No. CAS000002. These regulations 

prohibit discharges of storm water to waters of the United States from construction 

projects that encompass one or more acres of soil disturbance unless the discharge is in 

compliance with an NPDES permit. The California General Permit (enforced by the nine 

Regional Boards) requires all dischargers where construction activity disturbs one acre or 

more to do the following: 

• Develop and implement a SWPPP that specifies BMPs that will prevent all 

construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping 

all products of erosion from moving off site into receiving waters 

• Eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other 

waters of the nation 

• Perform inspections of all BMPs 

Los Angeles County requires an Erosion Control Plan (ECP) for all developments as part 

of the SWPP; if development is less than one acre, only an ECP is prepared. 

Construction activity subject to this General Permit includes clearing, grading, 

disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation that results in soil 

disturbances of at least one acre of total land area. Construction activity that disturbs less 

than one acre of soil is subject to this General Permit if the construction activity is part of 

a larger common development plan (encompassing one or more acres of disturbed soil) 

or if the construction causes significant impairment to local water quality. Construction 

activity does not include routine maintenance to maintain original line and grade, 

hydraulic capacity, or original purpose of the facility, nor does it include emergency 

construction activities required to protect public health and safety. A construction project 

that involves a dredge and/or fill discharge to any jurisdictional surface water (e.g., 

wetland, channel, pond, or marine water) also needs a CWA Section 404 permit from the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and a CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification from 

the Regional Board and State Board. Storm water discharges from dredge spoil 

placement, which occur outside of Corps jurisdiction (upland sites), and are part of 


3.3-5


construction activity that disturbs one or more acres of land are covered by this General 

Permit. 

It is the responsibility of the landowner to obtain coverage under this General Permit 

prior to commencement of construction activities. To obtain coverage, the landowner 

must file a NOI with a vicinity map and the appropriate fee with the State Board. 

Coverage under this permit does not occur until the applicant develops an adequate 

SWPPP for the project. Section A of the General Permit outlines the required contents of 

a SWPPP. For proposed construction activity on easements or on nearby property by 

agreement or permission, the entity responsible for the construction activity is required to 

file an NOI and filing fee and is responsible for development of the SWPPP, all of which 

must occur prior to commencement of construction activities. This General Permit does 

not apply to storm water discharges from the following: 

• Tribal Lands 

• The Lake Tahoe Hydrologic Unit 

• Construction by municipal entities with a population under 100,000 

• Construction under one acre, unless part of a larger common plan of development 

or sale 

• Projects covered by an individual NPDES Permit for storm water discharges 

associated with construction activity, and 

• Landfill construction that is subject to the general industrial permit. 

Local Regulations 

Inglewood Municipal Code 

The City’s Storm Water and Urban Runoff Controls ordinance includes the following 

requirements for owners/operators of industrial/commercial facilities: obtain permits for 

all connections to the storm drain; discharges to the storm drain must be composed 

entirely of storm water except as permitted; implement appropriate BMPs; regularly 

sweep and clean all parking lots with 25 or more spaces; and comply with all applicable 

NPDES requirements. 

• Issues 

• Local drainage problems may occur throughout the City. Staff is aware of local 

drainage threats such as storm water runoff entering culverts or underground into 

storm sewers. 

• Lack of maintenance can contribute to the flood hazard in urban areas. 


Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County. 2006. Website: www.lacsd.org, accessed 

March 31. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. “Clean Water Act, Section 402: 

3.3-6 



National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Website: 

http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/laws/section402.html, accessed March 31. 

Ballona Creek Watershed Management Plan 

City of Inglewood, Storm Water and Urban Runoff Controls Ordinance. 

City of Inglewood, Urban Water Management Plan, December 2005 

City of Inglewood, Water Master Plan, September 2003. 

Urban Water Management Plan, http://www.westbasin.org/pdf/UWMP_2005.pdf 


3.3-7

3.4 Solid Waste 

3.4 SOLID WASTE 

This section describes existing solid waste management and resource recovery systems for 

the City of Inglewood. In addition, a discussion of current local and regional regulations 

regarding the collection and disposal of solid waste is provided. Information for this 

section is based on the City’s Resource Allocation Plan, Source Reduction and Recycling 

Element, data from the Integrated Waste Management Board, and conversations with 

Department of Public Works staff. 


The residential solid waste generated in the City of Inglewood makes up 48 percent of the 

waste disposed to the landfills, and the commercial sector makes up the remaining 

52 percent of the waste disposed to the landfills. The primary facilities that are currently 

serving the City are the Puente Hills Landfill and the Carson Transfer Station which 

transfers solid waste to the El Sobrante Landfill located in Riverside County, California. 

The majority of residential solid waste generated in the City of Inglewood is collected and 

transported to a City-owned transfer station. Refuse is then consolidated and transported 

to a materials recovery facility where recycling materials are then sorted from refuse by 

machines and other methods. The remaining solid waste is then taken to one of three 

County landfills. Details regarding waste haulers, transfer stations, recycling facilities, and 

landfills are provided below. 

Solid Waste Haulers 

The City of Inglewood Municipal Code states that no person shall provide commercial 

solid waste handling services or conduct a solid waste enterprise in the City without 

having been awarded a non-exclusive solid waste franchise and entered into an agreement 

with the City. As part of its franchise agreement, all solid waste haulers that serve the City 

are prohibited from transporting any waste, residential, commercial, or industrial, outside 

of County limits. In the City of Inglewood, Waste Management is the only authorized 

solid waste hauler. The Refuse Division of the City General Services Department collects 

refuse from the majority of single-family homes and some multi-family complexes, 

commercial and industrial sectors within the City. 

Transfer Stations 

Transfer stations are facilities where refuse is sorted from recyclable material, and the 

residue is then transported to landfills that serve the residents of the County of Los 

Angeles. The Carson Transfer Station has 5,300 tons of capacity available under its daily 

capacity limit. The Carson transfer station transfers the solid waste to the El Sobrante 

Landfill located in Riverside County. Additional incidental volume is also delivered to a 

variety of other facilities from self haul generators. 


3.4-1


Waste Management has 346 strategically located transfer stations to consolidate, compact, 

and load waste from collection vehicles into long-haul trailers or rail cars for transport to 

landfills. This operation improves the utilization of collection equipment by minimizing 

transportation time and efficiently moving large volumes of waste to disposal sites. 30 

Table 3.4-1 

Transfer Station 

Transfer Stations 

Carson Transfer Station & Materials Recovery Facility/Waste 

Management, Inc. 

City of Inglewood Transfer Station/City of Inglewood 

SOURCE: 

Los Angeles Department of Public Works, 

http://ladpw.org/swims/general/facilities/nearestfacilitylist.asp 

Address 

321 W. Francisco St. 

Carson, CA 90745 

(310) 217-6300 

222 W. Beach Ave. 

Inglewood, CA 90302 

(310) 412-5278 

Landfills 

There are two landfills in Los Angeles County that currently serve the City of Inglewood: 

the Puente Hills Landfill and the El Sobrante Landfill. In 2004, the City of Inglewood 

disposed of approximately 99,757, 34 tons of solid waste, and in 2005, approximately 

82,180.79 tons 31 . The disposal volumes are trending down 17 percent due to the new 

recycling programs offered by the City. 32 

Waste Management also has the largest number of landfills in the industry. The 

Company's 293 active landfill sites have an average remaining permitted life of 22 years. 

Driven by federal, state and local regulatory requirements, the company utilizes advanced 

engineering, construction and monitoring methods to manage these landfills to the strict 

standards of safety and environmental responsibility required of the company. 

Puente Hills Landfill 

The Puente Hills Landfill is a critical component of the integrated waste management 

system serving Los Angeles County. The landfill is located in unincorporated Los Angeles 

County, south of the intersection of the Pomona (60) and San Gabriel (605) Freeways, 

adjacent to the City of Whittier. It has been owned and operated by the Sanitation 

Districts of Los Angeles County (LACSD) since 1970. The landfill operation includes 

environmentally sound disposal, recycling, and materials and energy recovery. A major 

part of LACSD's strategy for tackling waste management challenges into the future 

30 http://www.cityofinglewood.org/civica/inc/displayblobpdf2.asp?BlobID=2007 

31 Angela Williams, Solid Waste Division, City of Inglewood, personal communication, March 13, 2006. 

32 Ibid. 

3.4-2 



includes the transition to waste-by-rail. 33 The Puente Hills Landfill has a remaining 

capacity of 38 million tons at an average rate of 12,000 tons per day. 

El Sobrante Landfill 

The El Sobrante Landfill opened in 1986 as a partnership between Riverside County and 

Waste Management. The landfill area constitutes approximately 645 acres of the total 

property, while undisturbed open spaces account for approximately 688 acres, and is 

located south of Lake Matthews in western Riverside County, California. In August 2001, 

the facility received a major expansion and currently has 495 acres permitted for disposal 

activities with more than 165 million cubic yards of remaining capacity. The El Sobrante 

Landfill can accept up to 10,000 tons per day of waste from the counties of Riverside, 

Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, and San Bernardino, and currently has 25,000 tons of 

weekly capacity available 34 . Waste that is generated outside of Riverside County and 

disposed of at the El Sobrante Landfill provides a significant source of funding to the 

citizens of Riverside County for use in many local projects. 

Generation of Waste by Types 

Residential Waste 

A total of 39,000 housing units in just under nine square miles that make up the City of 

Inglewood dispose of 48 percent, or 57,000 tons, of the overall waste deposited at 

landfills. The average resident, the source of this tonnage, disposes three pounds of waste 

per day. Other organic materials, which include items such as food, leaves, and grass, 

typically make up 45 percent of all waste disposed of by single- or multi-family residents. 

This means that the grassy areas and tree-lined streets contribute to the largest and most 

commonly found component of the disposal stream. 

Of the 45 percent in organic waste, food waste makes up 17 percent of that figure. With 

residential waste, as can be expected in most active metropolitan regions, paper 

periodicals, being dispensed of once circulated and read, are often readily found 

representing 27 percent of Inglewood’s waste by-product. High-density polyethylene, and 

polyethylene terephthalate plastics (HDPE and PETE plastic containers), respectively 

represent Inglewood’s third largest material type disposed of by residences, with a 

nine percent constant in the overall contribution to the disposal stream. Ten percent of 

Inglewood’s residential waste is derived from construction and demolition waste and 

metals such as tin and steel cans. 

33 Puente Hills Landfill websitehttp://www.lacsd.org/swaste/Facilities/Open/puntehls.htm; 

http://www.lacsd.org/swaste/Publications/NewPHLFbrochure.htm#Introduction 

34 Angela Williams, personal communication, March 13, 2006. 


3.4-3


Table 3.4-2 

Overall Residential Waste Stream by Material Type 

Material Type Overall Residential Percentage Solid waste tonnage 

Paper 27.4% 13,618 

Glass 4.0% 2,002 

Metal 4.6% 2,295 

Plastic 8.8% 4,389 

Other organic 45.0% 22,323 

Construction and Demolition 4.5 2,222 

Household Hazardous Waste 0.3 160 

Special Waste 1.2 615 

Mixed Residue 4.0 1,985 

SOURCE: California Integrated Waste Management Board 

Last updated: August 14, 2003 

Commercial Waste 

In the City of Inglewood, local businesses disposed of 62,000 tons of waste in landfills. 

Employees of those same organizations produced eight pounds of waste per day, 

compared to the three pounds produced per day by each residence. The commercial 

sector makes up 52 percent of the waste disposed to the landfills. Waste composition 

studies conducted by the State Department of Integrated Waste Management Board show 

that paper, food waste, food contaminated paper, and waxy corrugated cardboard made 

up the largest segment of commercial waste that has no recycling system [Draft Solid 

Waste Management Report, and Plan of Action Fiscal Year 2003-2004]. The City has 

identified 40,000 tons of paper, food waste, and food-contaminated paper in the City’s 

commercial waste stream. 35 

Waste Diversion Rate 

The diversion rate is defined as the percentage of total waste that a city diverts from 

being disposed at permitted landfills and transformation facilities through reduction, 

reuse, recycling and composting programs. Cities were required by law to achieve 

25 percent diversion by 1995 and 50 percent diversion by the year 2000. 36 

35 City of Inglewood, Draft Solid Waste Management Report, and Plan of Action Fiscal Year 2003-2004, p 

1-34, http://www.cityofinglewood.org/civica/inc/displayblobpdf2.asp?BlobID=2007 

36 [Diversion: For waste measurement purposes, diversion is any combination of waste prevention (source 

reduction), recycling, reuse and composting activities that reduces waste disposed at permitted landfills and 

transformation facilities. Diversion is achieved through the implementation of diversion programs.] 

3.4-4 



Table 3.4-3 

Overall Commercial Waste Stream By Material Type 

Material Type 

Annual Disposal Tonnage 

Percent of Commercial 

Stream 

Food 9,891 18.2% 

Remainder/Composite Paper 6,770 12.5% 

Uncoated Corrugated Cardboard 3,572 6.6% 

Film plastic 2,529 4.7% 

Leaves and grass 2,501 4.6% 

Remainder/composite organic 2,414 4.4% 

Other miscellaneous paper 2,312 4.3% 

Lumber 2,094 3.9% 

Newspaper 2,025 3.7% 

Remainder/composite metal 1,513 2.8% 

White ledger 1,429 2.6% 

Textiles 1,321 2.4% 

Other ferrous 1,266 2.3% 

Bulky items 1,175 2.2% 

Other office paper 1,126 2.1% 

Magazines and Catalogs 1,020 1.9% 

Durable plastic 832 1.5% 

Remainder/composite plastic 813 1.5% 

Gypsum 784 1.4% 

Clear glass bottles and containers 663 1.2% 

Remainder/composite construction and demolition 591 1.1% 

Tin/steel cans 495 0.9% 

Rock, soil, and Fines 474 0.9% 

HDPE containers 418 0.8% 

Computer paper 286 0.5% 

Tires 252 0.5% 

Concrete 246 0.5% 

SOURCE: California Integrated Waste Management Board 

Last updated: May 12, 2003 

Table 3.4-4 below indicates the California Integrated Waste Management Board’s 

evaluation of Inglewood’s progress in implementing waste diversion and reduction 

programs from goal year 1995 to goal year 2000. As a result, the City has initiated several 

programs, including three cart separation system, e-waste recycling, household hazardous 

waste disposal program, and white goods recycling program. More recent information 

from the City reports a diversion rate of 46 percent in 2004. 


3.4-5


Table 3.4-4 

Diversion Rate, City of Inglewood 

Reporting Year 

Diversion rate 

1995 28 

1996 36 

1997 29 

1998 34 

1999 45 

2000 42 

2001 44 

Source: California Integrated Waste Management Board 


State Regulations 

Assembly Bill 939 

The State Legislature, through Assembly Bill 939, The California Integrated Waste 

Management Act of 1989, mandated that all cities and counties prepare, adopt, and 

submit a comprehensive solid waste management plan to the County. The plan must 

address and detail each individual community’s efforts and intended policies in the areas 

of waste characterization, source reduction, recycling, composting, solid waste facilities, 

education/public information, funding, special wastes, and hazardous wastes. The law 

also mandates that communities meet certain specific identified targets for percentages of 

waste reduction and recycling over specific identified targets for percentages of waste 

reduction and recycling over specified time periods (25 percent by 1995 and 50 percent 

by the year 2000.) 

AB 939 further requires each city to conduct a Solid Waste Generation Study and to 

prepare annually a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) to describe how it 

will reach its goals. The City of Los Angeles has also prepared a Solid Waste Management 

Policy Plan (CiSWMPP), which was adopted by the City Council in November 1994. The 

CiSWMPP is a long-term planning document containing goals, objectives, and policies 

for solid waste management for the City. It specifies citywide diversion goals and disposal 

capacity needs. 



In order to fulfill the requirements of the State mandate, the City of Inglewood has 

adopted City ordinances related to solid waste management. Section 7-5 of the City 

Municipal Code (Solid Waste Ordinance 2370 6-3-79) 37 requires businesses that provide 

37 City of Inglewood Municipal Code, Ordinance 2370 6-3-79. 

3.4-6 



commercial solid waste handling services in City limits to obtain a franchise in order to 

operate. The ordinance states that because State law requires the City to substantially 

reduce the amount of solid waste it sends to landfills, and the City is required to report to 

the State the amount of materials diverted from landfills in compliance with State law, the 

City must be able to regulate the collection of solid waste from residential and 

commercial premises through the requirements of a franchise. 

• Issues 

• The City failed to meet new waste diversion and recycling services needed to meet 

the State’s 50 percent waste diversion goal and faces possible punitive State fines 

and other penalties. 


Inglewood, City of. Inglewood, CA Municipal Code. Website: 

http://www.qcode.us/codes/inglewood/view.php?topic=7-5&showAll=1, March 

19. 

Inglewood, City of. 2003. Personal communication with Angela Willams, Solid Waste 

Division, City of Inglewood, 13 March. 

Waste Management website, Lists of landfills, 

http://www.wm.com/WM/community/WHC/WHC_Sites.asp; and 

http://www.wm.com/Templates/FAC2969/index.asp 

Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, 

http://www.lacsd.org/swaste/Facilities/Open/puntehls.htm 

Puente Hills Brochure, 

http://www.lacsd.org/swaste/Publications/NewPHLFbrochure.htm#Descriptionof 

Operations 

California Integrated Waste Management Board, Board Meeting, November 9-10, 2004, 

Agenda Item 24, pgs. 24-1 to 24-5. 

City of Inglewood, Draft Solid Waste Management Report, and Plan of Action Fiscal 

Year 2003–2004, p 1-34. 


3.4-7

3.5 Electricity 

3.5 ELECTRICITY 

This section defines the existing energy service providers of the City of Inglewood, 

specifically electricity services. Information was obtained from discussions with the 

service providers and City staff. 


Electrical Energy 

Electrical energy is supplied to the City of Inglewood by Southern California Edison 

(SCE). SCE currently operates one substation within the City, the Inglewood Substation 

that provides power to the City of Inglewood via SCE conduits and overhead lines. 

Electricity is a “reactive” utility, meaning it is provided on an as-needed basis to 

customers within existing structures in the City. For new construction, the provision of 

service may require a permit. 38 



Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission duties include the regulation of the 

transmission and sale of electricity in interstate commerce, licensing of hydroelectric 

projects, and oversight of related environmental matters. 


California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) 

CPUC Decision 95-08-038 contains the rules for the planning and construction of new 

transmission facilities, distribution facilities, and substations. The Decision requires 

permits for the construction of certain power line facilities or substations if the voltages 

would exceed 50 kV or the substation would require the acquisition of land or an increase 

in voltage rating above 50 kV. Distribution lines and substations with voltages less than 

50 kV need not comply with this Decision; however, the utility must obtain any 

nondiscretionary local permits required for the construction and operation of these 

projects. CEQA compliance is required for construction of facilities constructed in 

accordance with the Decision. 

38 Vivian Parker, personal communication, 2006, March 13. 


3.5-1


Title 20 and Title 24, California Code of Regulations (CCR) 

Title 20, Public Utilities and Energy, contains the regulations related to power plant siting 

certification. Title 24, California Building Standards, contains the energy efficiency 

standards related to residential and nonresidential buildings. Title 24 standards are based, 

in part, on a State mandate to reduce California’s energy demand. 

In accordance with Figure 66473.1 of the Subdivision Map Act, Figure 19.24.110, Energy 

Conservation, requires subdivisions of five or more lots, other than condominium 

conversions, to provide for, to the extent feasible, future passive or natural heating or 

cooling opportunities in the subdivision. The City, by State law is responsible for 

implementing a Subdivision Map Act. 



Chapter 15.32, Underground Utilities, requires the removal of poles, overhead wires and 

associated overhead structures within designated areas of the City and the underground 

installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication or similar or 

associated service. 

• Issues 

• There is an issue of aesthetic in retaining electrical services in above-ground 

transmission lines. 


Parker, Vivian. 2006. Personal communication, March 13. 

Inglewood, City of. 2006. Municipal Code. Website: 

http://qcode.us/codes/inglewood/main.php, accessed March 15. 

California Public Utilities Commission. 2006. Website: 

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/static/documents/index.htm, accessed March 15. 

California Code of Regulations. “Title 20,” 2006. Website: 

http://www.energy.ca.gov/siting/title20/index.html, accessed March 15. 

California Code of Regulations. “Title 20,” 2006. Website: 

http://www.bsc.ca.gov/title_24.html, accessed March 15. 

3.5-2 


3.6 Natural Gas 

3.6 NATURAL GAS 

This section defines the existing energy service providers of the City of Inglewood, 

specifically natural gas services. Information was obtained from discussions with the 

Southern California Gas Company, and websites. 


Natural Gas 

Natural Gas is supplied to the City of Inglewood by the Southern California Gas 

Company (So Cal Gas). So Cal Gas is the nation's largest natural gas distribution utility. 

Natural gas is a “fossil fuel,” indicating that it comes from the ground, similar to other 

hydrocarbons such as coal or oil. Currently, SCG maintains transmission and distribution 

lines throughout the City. Most lines operate at a medium pressure of approximately 30 

to 60 pounds per square inch (psi). Virtually all streets within the City have a buried 

pipeline that is part of the So Cal Gas network. 

The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) regulates So Cal Gas and is the default provider, 

required by State law, for natural gas delivery to the City. So Cal Gas has the capacity and 

resources to deliver gas except in certain situations that are noted in state law. As 

development occurs, SCG will continue to extend its service to accommodate 

development and supply the necessary gas lines. 

So Cal Gas does not base its service levels on the demands of the planning area; rather it 

makes periodic upgrades to provide service for particular projects and new development. 

Approximately two months before construction commences on a project, So Cal Gas 

requests that the developer contact them with detailed information about the project’s 

natural gas requirements. If necessary, So Cal Gas customizes pipelines and mains to 

better serve newly constructed facilities. The cost for such service differs from project to 

project. So Cal Gas is continuously expanding its network of gas pipelines to meet the 

needs of new commercial and residential developments in Southern California. 

Natural Gas Units 

Natural gas is usually sold by heat content, as opposed to volume. The standard units for 

buying and selling gas are based on the maximum heat produced by burning the fuel, 

known as the higher heating value. So Cal Gas bills retail fuel customers based on their 

fuel consumption measured in therms. By contrast, gas is traded in wholesale energy 

markets in quantities of millions of British Thermal Units (btu), also known as decatherms 

(by definition, a therm equals 1/10th of one mmbtu). 


3.6-1



California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) 

CPUC Decision 95-08-038 contains the rules for the planning and construction of new 

transmission facilities, distribution facilities, and substations. The Decision requires 

permits for the construction of certain power line facilities or substations if the voltages 

would exceed 50 kV or the substation would require the acquisition of land or an increase 

in voltage rating above 50 kV. Distribution lines and substations with voltages less than 

50 kV need not comply with this Decision; however, the utility must obtain any 

nondiscretionary local permits required for the construction and operation of these 

projects. CEQA compliance is required for construction of facilities constructed in 

accordance with the Decision. 

Title 20 and Title 24, California Code of Regulations (CCR) 

Title 20, Public Utilities and Energy, contains the regulations related to power plant siting 

certification. Title 24, California Building Standards, contains the energy efficiency 

standards related to residential and nonresidential buildings. Title 24 standards are based, 

in part, on a State mandate to reduce California’s energy demand. 

In accordance with Section 66473.1 of the Subdivision Map Act, Section 19.24.110, 

Energy Conservation, requires subdivisions of five or more lots, other than condominium 

conversions, to provide for, to the extent feasible, future passive or natural heating or 

cooling opportunities in the subdivision. The City, by State law is responsible for 

implementing a Subdivision Map Act. 



Chapter 15.32, Underground Utilities, requires the removal of poles, overhead wires and 

associated overhead structures within designated areas of the City and the underground 

installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication or similar or 

associated service. 

• Issues 

No issues have been identified pertaining to natural gas services in the City. 


Southern California Gas Company webpage, http://www.socalgas.com/, Accessed 

March 15, 2006. 

City of Inglewood, Strategic Opportunities Report, Calisonnet Corporation Updated, 

9/9/2004 

http://www.cityofinglewood.org/civica/inc/displayblobpdf2.asp?blobID=2568 

3.6-2 


3.7 Telecommunications 

3.7 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 

This section describes the existing telecommunications services including telephone, 

television, internet, and cellular phone services that are available to the City of Inglewood. 

Information for this section is based upon discussions with the service providers. 


Telephone Service 

Local telephone service is provided by Southwestern Bell Communications (SBC— 

formerly Pacific Bell). Several providers, including SBC, provide long distance phone 

service to Inglewood and also provide internet access via DSL, cable modem, and dial-up 

features. 

Cable Television Service 

The City does not have the legal authority to regulate cable television rates. Adelphia, 

Comcast or other local service providers charge rates based upon their cost of providing 

service. The company may increase their rates upon providing a 30-day notice. 

Internet Service 

Like cellular phone service, the popularity of internet service has resulted in 

diversification of internet service providers (ISP). Depending on the speed of connection 

desired, City residents have a number of options for internet service, including service by 

Comcast, SBC and local ISPs. 

Cellular Phone Service 

The popularity of cellular phones has resulted in a number of companies providing 

service to the community. Cellular phone service companies are licensed and monitored 

by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). 

Cellular phone service providers in the City are as follows: 

• Cingular Wireless 

• Sprint 

• Nextel 

• T Mobile 

• Verizon Wireless 

Municipal Area Network 

The Municipal Area Network (MAN) is a system of fiber-optic cables and electronic 

devices in host buildings that provide a gigabit high-speed protocol network serving few 

portions of the city. 


3.7-1


• Regulatory Context 


Telecommunications Act of 1996 

This law was enacted to promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure 

lower prices and higher quality services for telecommunication consumers and encourage 

the rapid deployment of new telecommunication technologies. 



The City of Inglewood Municipal Code, Section 8-1.17 (Community Antenna Television 

System), adopts rules and regulations to govern the operations of community antenna 

television systems in the City. Section 12-1.6.5 (Antennas and Telecommunication 

Facilities), provides definitions of the telecommunication facilities. 

Section 5-34 of the City’s Municipal Code (Radios, Television and Stereos, Noise 

Regulated) ensures consistency with noise regulations while promoting public health, 

safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare of the City's residents. 

Section 9-70 (Telephone Users Tax) imposes a tax upon every person in the City, other 

than a telephone corporation, using intrastate, interstate, or international telephone 

communication services. The tax imposed by this section is at the rate of ten percent of 

the charges made for such services. 

These regulations enhance the aesthetic quality and appearance of the City by maintaining 

architectural and structural integrity; and by protecting views and vistas from obtrusive 

and unsightly accessory uses and facilities. 

• Issues 

No issues have been identified related to telecommunications. 


City of Inglewood Municipal Code, Ordinance 

Phil Morrisio, personal communication, April 19, 2006. 

3.7-2 


3.8 Circulation 

3.8 CIRCULATION 

The Circulation section provides the transportation context for the General Plan by 

describing existing circulation and traffic conditions, plans, and policies that have a 

bearing on overall mobility in the City of Inglewood. This report serves as reference 

material and technical appendix for the Circulation Element. 

• Purpose of the Element 

The fundamental goal of the Circulation Element is to lay the groundwork for and 

promote the development of a coordinated, multi-modal citywide transportation system 

to meet the needs of all people living, working or visiting the City and all economic 

segments of the community. The City must achieve transportation goals while integrating 

and maintaining internal consistency with parts of the transportation systems that are 

under the control of other local, regional, and state agencies. The Circulation Element 

correlates all transportation issues into a set of coherent policies: the goals, objectives, 

policies, and programs of the element relate directly to other elements and issues 

addressed in the General Plan. 

The purpose of the Circulation Element is to set forth strategies to support the 

production of a circulation system consistent with the overall vision specified for the City. 

A well functioning transportation system in the City is of vital importance and a high 

priority. The State Legislature requires local governments to address this priority while 

considering economic, environmental, and fiscal factors and community goals set forth in 

the General Plan. This background report will be used in formulating the circulation 

policies and programs and will be reformatted herein to be consistent with the overall 

General Plan program. 

• Roadway System 

The classification of streets establishes a hierarchy of function for the circulation system 

of Inglewood. Traffic volume and street widths are not the only factors used for such 

classification, particularly in this city where existing narrow streets must often serve 

functions greater than their roadway widths should warrant. The actual use and location 

of streets are therefore also significant factors in the classification of Inglewood streets. 

Freeways 

Freeways are generally considered the most efficient type of highway for the movement 

of vehicles. These facilities were originally intended to serve longer trips of regional and 

interurban length. Caltrans, the State of California’s Department of Transportation, is 

responsible for the planning, design, construction, and maintenance or improvement of 

freeways. 


3.8-1


Two freeways either travel through or are immediately adjacent to the City of Inglewood: 

• The San Diego Freeway (Interstate 405) serves as a north/south route in the 

Inglewood area. It consists of four general traffic lanes, one auxiliary lane and one 

collector/distributor lane in each direction. Caltrans is currently constructing one 

high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction in the median of this facility. 

This facility carries approximately 311,000 vehicles per day. 

• The Glenn Anderson Freeway & Transitway (Interstate 105) is an east/west route 

along the south edge of Inglewood. It consists of three general traffic lanes and one 

HOV lane in each direction. This facility accommodates approximately 250,000 

vehicles per day. The Metro Green Line transit route is located in the median of 

this facility. 

Major Arterials 

Major arterials are the most important surface streets. They function as primary intercity 

routes (i.e. continuous routes into, through and out of the city) in addition to collecting 

and distributing a large portion of local traffic. Major arterials are typically designed to 

carry over 30,000 vehicles per day which means they should have a minimum of two 

travel lanes in each direction in addition to a separate median lane to accommodate left 

turn movement. However, depending upon traffic volume, particularly during peak traffic 

periods, additional travel lanes and/or the prohibition of curb parking may be necessary. 

The following streets in Inglewood are classified as Major Arterials: 

• Arbor Vitae Street (west of Prairie Avenue) 

• Centinela Avenue 

• Century Boulevard 

• Crenshaw Boulevard 

• Florence Avenue 

• Hawthorne Boulevard 

• Imperial Highway 

• La Brea Avenue 

• La Cienega Boulevard 

• Manchester Boulevard 

• Prairie Avenue 

• Aviation Boulevard (Manchester Boulevard to Arbor Vitae Street) 

• La Tijera Boulevard (La Cienega Boulevard to Knowlton Street) 

Minor Arterials 

Minor arterials, also referred to as secondary arterials, are similar to major arterials except 

that they may be discontinuous within the city, they may carry less traffic volume, and/or 

they may serve as extensions of other major arterials (e.g. Crenshaw Drive from 

Crenshaw Boulevard; or Kareem Court from Manchester Boulevard). Minor arterials are 

typically designed to carry 15,000 to 30,000 vehicles per day, which means they should 

have a minimum of two travel lanes in each direction. A separate median lane to 

accommodate left turn movement is desirable if there is sufficient roadway width. 

3.8-2 



The following streets in Inglewood are classified as Minor Arterials: 

• Crenshaw Drive 

• Eucalyptus Avenue (Beach Avenue to Arbor Vitae Street) 

• Fairview Boulevard (La Brea Avenue to Overhill Drive) 

• Kareem Court (Forum Road) 

• Inglewood Avenue (south of Manchester Boulevard) 

• Lennox Boulevard 

• Market Street (Florence Avenue to La Brea Avenue) 

• Overhill Drive 

• Van Ness Avenue 

• West Boulevard (north of Florence Avenue) 

• 108th Street (east of Crenshaw Boulevard) 

• 120th Street 

• 64 th Place (La Brea Avenue to north of 63 rd Street) 

Figure 3.8-1 shows the general lane configuration and median treatments for major and 

minor arterial facilities located in the City. 

Collectors 

Collectors are transitional streets between arterials and local streets. The function of a 

collector is to “collect” vehicles from the local street system and transport them to the 

arterial system. Collectors, however, also provide some cross-city access (e.g. Hyde Park 

Boulevard). Collectors may be designed to carry up to 15,000 vehicles per day, although 

3,000 to 10,000 vehicles is more typical. A collector will have at least one travel lane in 

each direction, but depending upon specific traffic volume or access function, two travel 

lanes in each direction might be utilized. 

The following streets in Inglewood are classified as Collectors: 

• Arbor Vitae Street (east of Crenshaw Boulevard) 

• Beach Avenue 

• Doty Avenue 

• Eucalyptus Avenue (north of Beach Avenue) 

• Eucalyptus Avenue (Arbor Vitae Street to Century Boulevard) 

• Fairfax Avenue 

• Fairview Boulevard (except La Brea Avenue to Overhill Drive) 

• Fir Avenue (Florence Avenue to Manchester Boulevard) 

• Freeman Avenue 

• Grevillea Avenue 

• Hardy Street 

• Hillcrest Boulevard 

• Hindry Avenue 

• Hyde Park Boulevard 

• Hyde Park Place 

• Inglewood Avenue (Florence Avenue to Manchester Boulevard) 

• Ivy Avenue 

• Juniper Street 

• Kelso Street - 90th Street (Inglewood Avenue to Crenshaw Boulevard) 


3.8-3


• La Tijera Boulevard 

• Locust Street (Regent Street to Hillcrest Boulevard) 

• Myrtle Avenue (Arbor Vitae Street to Century Boulevard) 

• Oak Street (Eucalyptus Avenue to Arbor Vitae Street) 

• Park Avenue (Warren Lane to Hyde Park Boulevard) 

• Regent Street 

• Springpark Avenue 

• Spruce Avenue (La Brea Avenue to Manchester Boulevard) 

• Warren Lane (Centinela Avenue to Park Avenue) 

• West Boulevard (north of Manchester Boulevard) 

• Yukon Avenue 

• 5 th Avenue (north of Manchester Boulevard) 

• 8 th Avenue 

• 64 th Street (Springpark Avenue to Garth Avenue) 

• 90 th Street (east of Crenshaw Boulevard) 

• 102 nd Street (east of Prairie Avenue) 

• 104 th Street 

• 108 th Street (Prairie Avenue to Crenshaw Boulevard) 

• 79 th Street (From Crenshaw Boulevard to Van Ness Avenue) 

• Lemoli Avenue 

• Pincay Drive 

• Plymouth Street (Beach Street to La Brea Avenue) 

• Felton Avenue (95 th Street to 98 th Street) 

• Field Avenue (Centinela Avenue to Hargrave Street) 

• Hill Street (La Cienega Boulevard to Beach Street) 

Operational Characteristics 

Level of service (LOS) is defined as a quality measure describing operational conditions 

within a traffic stream, generally in terms of such service measures as speed and travel 

time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, and comfort and convenience. Level of 

service indicators for the highway and roadway system are based on specific 

characteristics of traffic flow on designated sections of roadway during a typical day. For 

mainline freeway and roadway segments, these include overall traffic volume, speed and 

density. Several physical and operational characteristics of the roadway, such as lane 

configuration, free-flow speed (typical speed between intersections) and number of 

intersections per mile, are used to determine the vehicular capacity of the roadway 

segment. When these two sets of data are compared, a volume to capacity (V/C) ratio is 

calculated. These factors are then converted to an alpha descriptor identifying operating 

conditions and expressed as a level of service, or LOS, A through F. LOS A identifies the 

best operating conditions along a section of roadway and is characterized by free-flow 

traffic, low volumes and little or no restrictions on maneuverability. LOS F characterizes 

forced traffic flow with high traffic densities, slow travel speeds and often stop-and-go 

conditions. 

3.8-4 


K AREEM CT 



ARTERIAL STREETS LANES 

S L A B R 

0.4.1.3.0 

1.2.1.2.1 

1.2.0.2.1 

1.2.1.2.1 

1.2.1.3.0 

W F L ORE NCE AV 

0.2.0.2.0 

1.2.1.2.1 

0.2.0.2.1 

0.2.1.2.0 

1.1.0.1.1 

S L A CIE NE GA B LVD 

1.2.1.2.1 

1.1.0.1.1 

0.3.1.3.0 

0.1.0.1.0 0.2.1.3.0 0.2.1.2.0 

0.2.1.2.0 

1.1.0.1.1 

1.1.1.1.1 

S INGL E WOOD AV 

1.1.0.1.1 

CENT INE L A AV 

1.2.1.2.1 0.3.1.3.0 

1.2.1.2.1 

1.3.1.3.1 

1.1.0.1.1 

1.3.1.3.1 

0.2.1.2.0 

1.3.1.3.1 

N E UCALYPT US AV 

1.2.1.2.1 

1.2.1.2.1 

0.3.1.3.0 

N L A B RE A AV 

1.1.1.1.1 

S L A B R E A AV 

S MAR K E T S T 

E MANCHE S T E R B LVD 

E F L ORE NCE AV 

1.2.1.2.1 

S PRAIRIE AV 

0.3.1.3.0 

0.3.1.3.0 

0.2.1.2.0 

WE S T B LVD 

0.3.1.3.0 

CRE NS HAW DR CRE NS HAW B LVD 

1.2.1.2.1 

0.1.0.1.0 

1.1.1.1.1 

1.2.1.2.1 

1.2.1.2.1 

1.1.1.1.1 

0.3.1.2.1 

1.1.1.1.1 

W CE NT URY B LVD 

0.3.1.3.0 

S VAN NE S S AV 

CRE NS HAW B LVD 


Legend 

Street Classification 

Metro Rail 

Railroad 

Minor Streets 

Major 

Freeway On/Off Ramp 

Freeway 


¬(Ä 

1.2.1.2.1 

S PRAIRIE AV 

0.3.1.2.1 

¬(Ä ¬(Ä ¬(Ä 

1.2.1.2.1 

¬(Ä 

¬(Ä ¬(Ä 

¬(Ä ¬(Ä 

1.2.1.2.1 

¬(Ä 

CRE NS HAW B LVD 

1.2.1.3.0 

CR E NS HAW B LVD 

1.2.1.3.0 

W 108T H S T 

0.3.1.3.0 

¬(Ä¬(Ä¬(Ä ¬(Ä 

1.1.0.1.1 

1.2.0.2.1 


W IMPE RIAL HWY 

Source: City of Inglewood, Public Works Department. 

Date: May 3, 2006 


Not to Scale 

Figure 3.8-1


Information detailing the lane configurations, ADT volumes and LOS values for major 

roadway facilities located in the City of Inglewood are shown in the Table 3.8-1 below. 

This data is based on information obtained from 24-Hour counts conducted by the City 

of Inglewood in May and June of 2005. 

Table 3.8-1 

Roadway 

Average Daily Traffic Volume, Lane Configuration and 

Daily Level of Service for Major Roadways 

Located in the City of Inglewood 

Segment 

ADT Volume 

(000’s) 

Total No. 

of Lanes 

East/West Facilities 

Arbor Vitae St 

Aviation Blvd to Inglewood Ave 17–18 4 B–C 

Eucalyptus Ave to Prairie Ave 13–15 4 C–D 

Century Blvd 

La Cienega Blvd—Rte 405 Fwy 59 6 E 

Rte 405 Fwy—Van Ness Ave 33–43 6 C–D 

Florence Ave 

Aviation Blvd—Centinela Ave 17–28 4 C–D 

Centinela Ave—West Blvd 35–43 4 C–D 

Imperial Hwy Prairie Ave—Van Ness Ave 25–35 6 C–D 

Lennox Blvd West of Prairie Ave 8 4 B–C 

Manchester Blvd Aviation Blvd—Van Ness Ave 25–37 6 C–D 

North/South Facilities 

Aviation Blvd Manchester Blvd—Arbor Vitae St 18 4 C–D 

Centinela Ave 

La Cienega Blvd—La Brea Ave 32 4 D–E 

La Brea Ave—Florence Ave 24–27 4 C–D 

Crenshaw Blvd 79th St—Rte 105 Fwy 34–39 6 C–D 

Crenshaw Dr Crenshaw Blvd—Manchester Blvd 3 2 A 

Eucalyptus Ave 

Beach Ave—Florence Ave 15 2 D–E 

Florence Ave—Arbor Vitae St 6–7 2 C–D 

Hawthorne Blvd Century Blvd—104th St 35 6 B–C 

Inglewood Ave Manchester Blvd—south of Century Blvd 7–15 4 B–C 

La Brea Ave 64th St—Century Blvd 22–39 6 C–D 

North of Fairview Blvd—Industrial Ave 64 6 E 

La Cienega Blvd North of Florence Ave—Century Blvd 17–27 4 C–D 

Century Blvd—Rte 405 S Fwy Ramps 31 4 D–E 

Market St Manchester Blvd—Hillcrest Blvd 4 2 A–B 

Florence Ave—Regent St 29 4 D–E 

Prairie Ave Regent St—Manchester Blvd 33 4 E 

Manchester Blvd—Imperial Hwy 28–40 6 C–D 

Van Ness Ave 

79th St—Century Blvd 16 4 C–D 

Century Blvd—Imperial Hwy 16–17 4 B–C 

West Blvd Hyde Park Blvd—Redondo Blvd 17 4 C–D 

Daily 

LOS 


3.8-7


City-Owned Parking Lots 

The City of Inglewood currently owns and operates nineteen surface parking lots and two 

parking structures located throughout the central business district and along Arbor Vitae 

Street. The surface parking lots provide a total of 746 parking spaces. This total includes 

twelve existing handicap spaces and one van-accessible space. A new surface parking lot 

is to be constructed at 670 W. Arbor Vitae Street and will contain 23 parking spaces. 

The two parking structures contain a total of 786 parking spaces. Also included in this 

total are thirteen existing handicap spaces and four van-accessible spaces. 

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 

The need for the County to maintain a comprehensive and functional circulation system 

over such an enormous geographical area requires a coordinated effort from all of the 

local municipalities located within Los Angeles County. This is the main objective of the 

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro). Metro serves as the 

County Transportation Commission and is responsible for allocating and programming 

State and Federal funds for regional transportation projects throughout the County. 

Metro is governed by a thirteen-member Board of Directors comprising the following: 

• The five Los Angeles County Supervisors 

• The Mayor of Los Angeles 

• Three Los Angeles mayor-appointed members 

• Four city council members representing the other 87 cities in Los Angeles County 

• The Governor of California appoints one non-voting member 

Currently, Metro operates over 2,000 peak-hour buses on an average weekday and has 

designed, built and operates over 70 miles of Metro Rail service. The Metro Rail system 

consists of the Metro Red Line subway system, the Metro Blue Line, the Metro Green 

Line, and the Metro Gold Line. In total, the Metro Rail system serves 62 rail stations 

stretching from Long Beach to downtown Los Angeles to Hollywood, Universal City and 

North Hollywood in the San Fernando Valley, from downtown Los Angeles to Pasadena, 

and from Norwalk to El Segundo and all points in between. 

Additionally, Metro funds 16 municipal bus operators and a wide array of transportation 

projects including bikeways and pedestrian facilities, local roads and highway 

improvements, goods movement, Metrolink, and the popular Freeway Service Patrol and 

Call Boxes. Recognizing that no one form of transit can solve urban congestion 

problems, Metro's multimodal approach uses a variety of transportation alternatives to 

meet the needs of the highly diverse populations in the region. 

Congestion Management Program 

The Congestion Management Program (CMP) was enacted as a part of Proposition 111 

by voters in 1990. The intent of this program was to link land use, transportation and air 

quality decisions; develop a partnership among transportation decision makers in 

3.8-8 



developing multi-modal transportation solutions; and that the CMP be the first step in 

identifying congestion relief projects for state gas tax funding. The CMP is managed by 

Metro, the designated Congestion Management Agency, with required participation by all 

local municipalities. 

State legislation requires that the CMP identify a primary system of existing and proposed 

highways and arterial streets and establish a set of minimum level of service performance 

criteria for these routes. The CMP was also required to set standards for transit service 

(bus and rail) and trip reduction programs. Thirdly, the CMP was required to develop a 

system to analyze impacts on the regional transportation system as a result of land use 

decisions made by local jurisdictions. Whenever it is determined that a land use decision 

(typically resulting in new or intensified development) will have an impact, measures are 

to be imposed upon the development(s) to mitigate any congestion impact. This may 

include exacting mitigation fees, that Metro will apply to a capital improvement program, 

by which improvements may be made to the CMP-identified highways and streets, transit 

systems and other related projects to reduce congestion. 

Two routes through the City of Inglewood have been identified as part of the CMP 

network and are subject to impact analysis and congestion mitigation if necessary: 

• Manchester Boulevard and 

• San Diego Freeway (Interstate Route 405) 

Nearby routes that could be impacted by Inglewood developments include Sepulveda 

Boulevard (State Route 1) and the Harbor Freeway (Interstate Route 110). 

The CMP network also includes arterial monitoring stations that are located at 

intersections between CMP arterial routes and other regional significant roadway 

facilities. Currently, there are two monitoring stations located within the City of 

Inglewood. These stations are located at the following intersections: 

• Manchester Boulevard at Crenshaw Boulevard 

• Manchester Boulevard at La Brea Avenue. 

These facilities are currently not included as part of the CMP network, but have been 

identified for possible inclusion should traffic operations deteriorate in the future. 

The CMP also requires each city to annually prepare a Deficiency Plan for any portion of 

a CMP system route in its jurisdiction that deteriorates below minimum service standards. 

The Plan must identify the cause of the deficiency and a list of measures and/or 

improvements needed to re-attain the service standard. Metro will review and accept or 

reject each city’s Deficiency Plan. If rejected, the Plan must be revised by the city to the 

satisfaction of the Metro. 

• Public Transportation 

Metro, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, is responsible for 

public transit service in the City of Inglewood. Currently, Metro has 2,250 buses 


3.8-9


operating on 191 transit routes, providing service to approximately 1.25 million riders 

across Los Angeles County on an average weekday. 

Bus Transit 

As a part of its overall service, Metro operates twenty-one transit routes that travel within 

or through the City of Inglewood. These routes include the following: 

• Two local routes to Downtown Los Angeles 

• Twelve local routes to other areas within the Los Angeles metropolitan area 

• Two limited-stop routes 

• One express route to Downtown Los Angeles 

• One special service route 

• Three Metro Rapid routes 

These routes are shown in Figure 3.8-2. The following is a list of the roadways upon 

which bus transit routes are currently operating and the number of routes on each 

roadway: 

Roadway 

No. of Transit Routes 

108 th Street 2 

Arbor Vitae Street 1 

Centinela Avenue 1 

Century Boulevard 3 

Crenshaw Boulevard 4 

Florence Boulevard 3 

Hawthorne Boulevard 1 

Hyde Park Boulevard 2 

Imperial Highway 1 

Inglewood Avenue 1 

La Brea Avenue 5 

La Tijera Boulevard 1 

Manchester Boulevard 4 

Prairie Avenue 3 

Van Ness Avenue 1 

I-Line Shuttle Trolley 

The “I-Line Shuttle Trolley” is a free transit service offered to any individual residing or 

visiting Inglewood through the City’s Senior Center Transportation programs. The 

service operates on weekdays and Saturdays from 10:00 A.M. to 4:30 P.M. and travels 

exclusively within the City of Inglewood along the route provided in Figure 3.8-3 below. 

3.8-10 




METRO BUS ROUTES WITHIN THE 


Source: City of Inglewood, Public Works Department, February 2006. 

Date: May 3, 2006 


Not to Scale 

Figure 3.8-2

S R E DF E R N AV 

AL L E Y 

N OAK S T 

S OAK S T 

N CE DAR S T 

S CE DAR AV 

S INGL E WOOD AV 

S F IR AV 

S F IR AV 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

S WAL NU T S T 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

S MY R T L E AV 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

CU L L E N WY 

NOB E L W Y 



I-LINE SHUTTLE TROLLEY 

W H IL L S DAL E S T 

AL L E Y 

N B E ACH S T 

W VE NICE WY 

CE NT INE L A AV 

W B E ACH AV 

W R AIL R OAD P L 

W R E GE NT S T 

W QU E E N S T 

W OL IVE S T 

W K E L S O S T 

W ELM AV 


S F E LT ON AV 

W 95TH ST 

W P LY MOU T H S T 

W 98T H S T 

W 99TH ST 

P INE CT 

AL L E Y 

ALLEY 

W MANCH E S T E R B LVD 

ALLEY 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

Legend 

# 

Stops 

N OAK S T 

W AR B OR VIT AE S T 

W 93R D S T 

W 96TH ST 

W 97T H S T 


I-Line 

W OL IVE S T 

22 ! 

21 ! 

20 ! 

S E U CALY P T U S AV 

N E U CALY P T U S AV 

N L A B R E A AV 

16 ! 

S F IR AV 

23 ! 

N MAR K E T S T 

19 ! 

W F L OR E NCE AV 

W L IME S T 

W S P R U CE AV 

W MAGNOLIA AV 

W 94T H S T 

S R OSE WOO D AV 

W H IL L S DAL E S T 

W H AR DY S T 

S T R U R O AV 

E P LY MOU T H S T 

S WALNUT ST 

S WAL NU T S T 

W IVY AV 

S GR E VIL L E A AV 

AL L E Y 

24 ! 

18 ! 

17 ! 

DAVIS DR 

AL L E Y 

AL L E Y 

14 ! 

13 ! 

12 ! 

11 ! 

10 ! 

! 9 

! 5 

S L A B R E A AV 

E B RE T T S T 

E H IL L S DAL E S T 

25 ! 

E S T E P NE Y S T 

15 ! 

! 30 

! 2 

! 3 

! 4 

26 ! 

28 ! 

29 ! 

! 1 

! 8 

6! 

E H Y DE PAR K B LVD 

E WAR R E N L N 

E B E ACH AV 

E T AMAR ACK AV 

E B U CK T H OR N S T 

S MAPLE A V 

E H AZ E L S T 

E IVY AV 

AL L E Y 

S LAR CH S T 

AL L E Y 

E 97T H S T 

E 98T H S T 

N H IL L CR E S T B LVD 


E HARDY ST 

E 99TH ST 

ALLEY 

E 67T H S T 

E F L OR E NCE AV 

E R E GE NT S T 

E K E L S O S T 

E L A B R E A DR 

! 7 

AL L E Y 

E 97T H S T 

N PARK AV 

N P R AIR IE AV 

E NU T WOOD S T 

S P R AIR IE AV 

27 ! 

P VT 

E AE R ICK S T 

E QU E E N S T 

MANCH E S T E R T E R 

MANCH E S T E R DR 

S FL OWE R S T 

AL L E Y 

E 66T H S T 

B NS F R R 

P VT 

N E AS T P K WY 

N GAY S T 

E 68T H S T 

Carlton 

Square 

VICT OR IA AV 

W 85T H S T 

W MANCH E S T E R B LVD 

KAREEM CT 

AL L E Y 

R E DONDO B LVD 

AR MIT AGE AV 

W 74T H P L 

W 75T H P L 

W 78TH ST 

WE S T B LVD 

K E NS L E Y DR 

B R Y NH U R S T AV 

AL L E Y 

Briarw 

P INCAY DR 

P VT 


Date: May 3, 2006 


Not to Scale 

Figure 3.8-3


Para Transit 

The Inglewood Senior Center also provides a van service that is available to residents of 

the areas of Inglewood, Hawthorne and Lennox. This service is a demand-based service 

with a one-way fare cost of $0.50 or a monthly pass of $5.00. 

The City of Inglewood also maintains a service directory for organizations and agencies 

that provide specialized transportation for seniors and persons with disabilities. This 

directory currently lists approximately 20 public transit operators and social service 

transportation providers that have been registered by the City to provide access to 

seniors, disabled persons and persons of limited means. 

Light Rail Transit 

Located in the median of the Glenn Anderson (I-105) Freeway, the Metro Green Line is 

the closest rail transit facility to the City of Inglewood. This system carries approximately 

36,000 riders on an average weekday and had approximately 9.65 million boardings in 

2005. The Crenshaw Boulevard/I-105 Station is the nearest station, located immediately 

south of the I-105 Freeway, just east of Crenshaw Boulevard. This station provides free 

daily parking for up to 500 vehicles and is the connecting point for several Metro bus 

routes throughout the City. 

• Transportation Demand Measures 

Park & Ride Facilities 

A Park & Ride lot is a group of parking spaces designated specifically for the purpose of 

giving people a place to park so they can meet up with their carpool, vanpool or buspool 

partners. Some Park & Ride lots are also served by transit. Amenities range from parking 

spaces only to security service, bicycle lockers, telephones, restrooms and even child care 

centers. A Park & Ride lot can be as big as hundreds of parking spaces with all the perks 

or as small as a designated area at a church or shopping center parking lot. 

Currently, there are no Park & Ride facilities located within the City of Inglewood. The 

closest facilities are located at the Crenshaw/I-105 Metro Green Line Station and the 

Hawthorne/I-105 Metro Green Line Station, which contain 500 and 600 parking spaces, 

respectively. Both facilities are free of charge and open for public use 24 hours a day, 

seven days a week. The following information contains descriptions of each facility, 

operating agency and transit connections. 

Crenshaw/I-105 Metro Green Line Station 

Location and Size: 11901 S. Crenshaw Blvd., 500 spaces 

Operator: Metro 

Amenities: 10 bike rake spaces and 2 bike lockers 

Connecting Transit: Metro Local—210; Metro Rapid—710, 757 


3.8-15


Hawthorne/I-105 Metro Green Line Station 

Location and Size: 11230 S. Acacia St, 600 spaces 

Operator: Metro 

Amenities: 8 bike rake spaces 

Connecting Transit: 

Metro Local—40, 119, 126, 212; Metro Limited Stop—312; 

Metro Express—442; Metro Rapid—740 

Bicycle Routes 

Two major issues involving bicycle usage are present in the City of Inglewood: safety and 

access. The increasing volume of motorized traffic on major arterials and at intersections 

throughout the City is becoming a safety hazard for bicyclists. These thoroughfares are 

becoming barriers to bicycle and pedestrian traffic attempting to cross these corridors. 

The lack of a comprehensive bicycle network requires cyclists to travel along high-volume 

arterial roadways, many of which lack appropriate bicycle facilities, without an acceptable 

alternative. Many roadways within the City do not contain adequate bicycle facilities to 

protect cyclists from potential dangerous conditions as reduced visibility and 

maneuverability or proximity to high-speed traffic. 

Bicycle routes are classified into three separate classes or types. Class I bicycle routes are 

generally a paved path that is physically separated from roadway facilities. Many times, 

these facilities are located along rail, water or utility corridors. Class II bicycle routes 

consist of striped one-way lanes along streets, generally located immediately adjacent to 

the curb, designated for bicycle use only. Class III bicycle routes are most common and 

consist of a designated travelway for bicycles that is delineated through the use of “bike 

route” signs only with no other physical modifications to the roadway. 

There currently are no existing bicycle routes located within the City. A preliminary 

network of bicycle routes have been developed by the City’s Public Works Department 

and is shown in Figure 3.8-4. The location and designation of several proposed bicycle 

facilities are discussed below: 

• Fairview Boulevard, from Springpark Avenue to West Boulevard. A future 

connection could be made to the existing bicycle route located along Green Valley 

Circle, near the Fox Hills Mall, in the City of Los Angeles. 

• Marlborough Avenue/Vincent Park/Hillcrest Boulevard/La Brea Avenue. This 

alignment would act as a north/south spine from which future facilities could 

branch and would provide a direct connection between North Park, Vincent Park 

and the Inglewood Transit Center. A future connection could be made to the 

Hawthorne/I-105 Metro Green Line Station. 

• Florence Avenue, from Centinela Avenue to West Boulevard. A future connection 

could be made to the existing bicycle route located along 74 th Street, in the Hyde 

Park neighborhood in the City of Los Angeles. 

3.8-16 




CITY OF INGLEWOOD PROPOSED BICYCLE ROUTES 


Date: May 3, 2006 


Scale in Miles 

Figure 3.8-4


• Arbor Vitae Street, from the Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railroad tracks, just 

west of Aviation Boulevard, to Van Ness Avenue. This alignment could function as 

an east/west “trunk” route from which future branch routes could originate. A 

future connection could be made to the existing bicycle route located along 96 th 

Street, near Jesse Owens Park, in the City of Los Angeles. 

The class or type of bicycle facility has not been determined for any of these proposed 

alignments since this decision is based upon the availability of adequate right-of-way 

either within or adjacent to the existing roadways. 

• Railroads 

The former Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) rail corridor, paralleling 

Florence Avenue, is the only existing railroad facility still in operation in the City of 

Inglewood. This right-of-way was purchased by Metro for possible future use as a light 

rail or busway facility. It is currently utilized by oil refineries and other industrial uses 

located in the South Bay region. At this time, there are twelve at-grade rail crossings along 

this corridor regulated by gate arms, lights and warning bells. 

Traffic operations at many of the rail crossings require queued vehicles to extend across 

the rail tracks while waiting for traffic signals to change. Due to physical limitations 

associated with moving either the rail line or Florence Avenue, this issue will continue 

until this rail corridor is no longer utilized. The only viable solution would be to construct 

grade-separate rail crossings which would be extremely costly. 

• Truck Routes 

As stated in Chapter 3, Article 3 of the Inglewood Municipal Code, certain streets in the 

city are designated as truck routes, as shown in Figure 3.8-5. These designated routes are 

determined by the City Council and identified with street signs to guide truck traffic 

through the city. Vehicles exceeding three tons may only travel on these facilities and are 

restricted from using all other streets in the city unless they are picking up or delivering 

merchandise at businesses or sites located on these restricted streets. 

The City has generally utilized arterial streets as designated truck routes in an attempt to 

restrict heavy- weight vehicles to streets constructed to carry such weight. These routes 

were also selected to keep large vehicles away from residential neighborhoods to decrease 

the amount of air and noise pollution to which city residents may be exposed. Two 

exceptions currently exist: (1) East Hyde Park Boulevard and Hyde Park Place, which 

have street widths too narrow to be classified an arterial route but which serve various 

small light manufacturing and heavy commercial businesses located in northeast 

Inglewood, and (2) 102nd Street (between Prairie Avenue and Yukon Avenue) which 

serves the new manufacturing and air freight businesses being developed in the Century 

Redevelopment Project area. 


3.8-19


• Intelligent Transportation Systems Applications 

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) constitute a wide spectrum of techniques and 

applications that are currently being applied to existing roadways, highways and transit 

systems to increase their efficiency, safely and ability to relieve congestion. The City of 

Inglewood is currently employing the following types of Intelligent Transportation 

Systems (ITS) applications: 

• Fiber optic communication system used to transmit real-time traffic signal 

controller and video data for the City’s Advanced Traffic Management System 

(ATMS) 

Communication hubs are installed at various locations in the City to provide connection 

points for future fibers: 

• Traffic signals at 138 intersections with the City, of which two are owned by the 

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and two by the Los Angeles 

Department of Transportation (LADOT) 

• Traffic Signal Control System with 116 local controllers centrally interconnected to 

the City’s Traffic Management Center (TMC) providing central signal monitoring 

and the ability to upload and download timing plans from City Hall 

• CCTV surveillance system including several cameras installed at critical locations 

for traffic surveillance and incident management purposes 

• Traffic Management Center (TMC) maintained by the Department of Public 

Works, that provides traffic control capabilities to the City Staff 

• Issues 

• While some progress has been made towards aligning intersections since the 

development of the previous Element, several locations still require detailed 

analysis and the implementation of mitigation measures or improvements if 

deemed necessary. 

• As a result of traffic growth in the area and the physical limitations found along 

several major roadway facilities, some neighborhoods are experiencing problems 

with “cut-thru” traffic, or vehicles utilizing less congested neighborhood streets to 

bypass areas of congestion on more heavily traveled facilities. This situation 

degrades the surrounding neighborhoods in terms of quality of life and creates 

possible dangerous conditions. 

• Contrary to the City’s Downtown Street Design Study which recommended the 

conversion of both La Brea Avenue and Market Street into directional one-way 

thoroughfares, currently, both streets still operate as two-directional facilities with 

La Brea Avenue bearing the brunt of overall growth in traffic volumes. 

• Crenshaw Boulevard has seen a substantial increase in traffic volumes due to the 

completion of a freeway interchange with the Glenn Anderson Freeway (I-105), 

located immediately south of the City of Inglewood. This situation is magnified by 

the absence of a direct freeway interchange along either Western Avenue or Prairie 

Avenue, the two major north/south roadway facilities located on either side of 

Crenshaw Boulevard. 

3.8-20 





DESIGNATED TRUCK ROUTES 

LA BREA 

CENTINELA 

HYDE PARK 

LA CIENEGA 

CRENSHAW 

WEST 

EUCALYPTUS 

FLORENCE 

MANCHESTER 

AVIATION 

ARBOR VITAE 

PRAIRIE 

CENTURY 

HAWTHORNE 

102ND 

IMPERIAL 


Date: May 3, 2006 


Not to Scale 

Figure 3.8-5


• The current revision of the LAX Master Plan is expected to include several 

significant improvements to roadway facilities such as Arbor Vitae Avenue, 

Century Boulevard, La Cienega Boulevard, Aviation Boulevard and Lennox 

Boulevard. These improvements will greatly affect the current traffic distribution 

across the City. 

• Currently, the City does not have either a bicycle plan or any existing dedicated 

bicycle routes. 

• Several areas of the City are currently experiencing issues regarding the lack of onstreet 

parking. This may be the result of insufficient roadway right-of-way to 

accommodate growth in traffic volumes without sacrificing parking. 


City of Arcadia ITS Development Plan. (2003). 

Foothill Transit, Foothill Transit System Maps Website: 

http://www.foothilltransit.org/Schedules_Routes/service_area_map.htm 

http://www.foothilltransit.org/Schedules_Routes/schedules.htm, Accessed April 

27, 2005. 

Gonzales, R.S. 2001. City of Arcadia Circulation Map. Development Services 

Department, Engineering Division. 

———. 2004. City of Arcadia Traffic Volume Map. Development Services Department, 

Engineering Division. 

Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). (2003). Trip Generation, 7 th Edition, 

Washington, D.C. (Publication No. IR-016E). 

———. (2004). Trip Generation Handbook, Second Edition, Washington, D.C. (Publication 

No. RP-028B). 

International Council of Shopping Centers, Research and Statistics Website: 

http://www.icsc.org/srch/sct/sct0602/page35.php?region=, Accessed August 18, 

2005. 

Kaku Associates. 2006. The Methodist Hospital of Southern California Master Plan Data. 

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2004. Rusnak/Arcadia Expansion, Morlan Place Project 

Traffic Impact Analysis. 

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 2004. Congestion 

Management Program for Los Angeles County, Los Angeles. 

———. 2005. Website: http://www.mta.net/riding_metro/riders_guide/planning_trip- 

01.htm#TopOfPage, Accessed April 27, 2005. 

Santa Anita Racetrack Attendance Data, provided by Santa Anita Racetrack Staff in 

February, 2005. 

3.8-22 


CHAPTER 4 

Community Services 

This chapter provides information on the City’s existing community services. This 

Chapter includes the following sections: 

• Schools 

• Recreation and Parks 

• Library Services 

4.1 SCHOOLS 

This section describes existing school facilities, education programs, and planned 

improvements within the City of Inglewood. Information from this section is based upon 

the Education Data Partnership website, the State Allocation Board website, the 

California Department of Education and Office of Public School Construction websites, 

and the Inglewood Unified School District Departments of Educational Services, Special 

Education, and Business Services. 


Schools 

Within Inglewood, there are 13 public elementary schools and six secondary schools. In 

addition, there is one preschool center with an approximate enrollment of 300 students 

and a community adult school with approximately 8,000 students. The School District 

headquarters are located at 401 S. Inglewood Avenue within Inglewood. Figure 4.1-1 

identifies Inglewood Unified School District school locations, as well as private schools 

and charter schools located within the City, and corresponds to Table 4.1-1, which lists 

existing public schools and their associated enrollments and capacities as of the 2005/06 

school year. 

The Inglewood Unified School District (IUSD) served approximately 16,164 public 

school students in kindergarten through 12th grade from the cities of Inglewood and the 

unincorporated area of Ladera Heights during the 2005/06 school year, as depicted in 

Table 4.1-1 39 . This represents approximately 84 percent of the total capacity. Only three 

of the 20 schools in the District exceeded capacity, including Beulah Payne Elementary 

School (104 percent), Hillcrest Continuation High School (115 percent), and City Honors 

High School (107 percent). Many of the elementary schools within Inglewood are 

operated on a year-round schedule and use “relocatable” classrooms in order to reduce 

the effects of overcrowding. However, beginning in the 2006/07 school year, all schools 

in the District will operate on a traditional calendar. 40 

39 Sage Institute, 2006. Inglewood Unified School District CBED Enrollments 2005-06. 2005 

40 Sage Institute, 2006. Inglewood Unified School District CBED Enrollments 2005-06. 


4.1-1

Chapter 4 Community Services 

In accordance with the IUSD’s philosophy of equal educational opportunities for all 

students, school enrollments is to be capped at a level that the school facilities and 

classrooms can provide the District’s authorized educational program. 

Within IUSD boundaries, there are four charter schools. Charter schools are independent 

public schools designed and operated by educators, parents, community leaders, 

educational entrepreneurs, etc. In California, charter schools receive state and local 

funding on a per student allotment. Included in Table 4.1-1 is a list of the charter schools 

and their associated enrollments. There are also two new charter schools planned for 

development in the City, including one high school and one elementary school. 41 

Table 4.1-1 

Public Schools Operated by the Inglewood Unified School 

District 

Map 

No. School Grades Capacity 

Enrollment 

2005/06 

Percent of 

Capacity 

Elementary Schools 

1 

Beulah Payne Elementary School (YR) 

215 West 94 th Street 

K–5 763* 797 104% 

2 

Centinela Elementary School (YR) 

1123 Marlborough Avenue 

K–6 1,195* 1,036 87% 

3 

Clyde Woodworth Elementary School (YR) 

3200 W. 104th Street 

K–5 1,100* 760 69% 

4 

Daniel Freeman Elementary School (TS) 

2602 West 79th Street 

K–6 478 400 84% 

5 

Frank D. Parent Elementary School (TS) 

5345 West 64 th Street 

K–8 814 743 91% 

6 

Highland Elementary School (TS) 

430 Venice Way 

K–5 851 763 90% 

7 

W. Claude Hudnall Elementary School (YR) 

331 W. Olive Street 

K–5 557* 467 84% 

8 

Bennett/Kew Elementary School (TS) 

11710 South Cherry Avenue 

K–5 859 784 91% 

9 

William H. Kelso Elementary School (YR) 

809 E. Kelso Street 

K–5 970* 789 81% 

10 

La Tijera Elementary School (TS) 

1415 N. La Tijera Boulevard 

K–8 893 793 89% 

11 

Oak Street Elementary School (YR) 

633 S. Oak Street 

K–5 1,069* 806 75% 

12 

Warren Lane Elementary School (TS) 

9335 S. 8 th Avenue 

K–8 1,000 881 88% 

13 

Worthington Elementary School (YR) 

11101 S. Yukon Avenue 

K–5 1,038* 776 75% 

Totals 11,587 9,795 84.5% 

41 Vail, Jennifer, 2006. Sage Institute, Incorporated. Personal communication. 4 August. 

4.1-2 


4.1 Schools 

Table 4.1-1 

Public Schools Operated by the Inglewood Unified School 

District 

Map 

No. School Grades Capacity 

Middle Schools 

14 

Crozier Middle School (YR) 

151 N. Grevillea Avenue 

15 

Albert F. Monroe Middle School (TS) 

10711 South 10th Avenue 

High Schools 

16 

Hillcrest Continuation High School (TS) 

441 Hillcrest Street 

17 

Inglewood High School (TS) 

231 South Grevillea Avenue 

18 

Morningside High School (TS) 

10500 S. Yukon Avenue 

19 

City Honors High (TS) 

555 W. Kelson Street 

Adult Schools 

Inglewood Community Adult School 

20 

106 E. Manchester Blvd., Suite #350 

Los Angeles Unified School District 

Century Park Elementary School (TS) 

21 

10935 South Spinning Ave. 

Enrollment 

2005/06 

Percent of 

Capacity 

6–8 1,358* 1,147 84% 

6–8 1,566 1,186 76% 

Totals 2,924 2,333 79.8% 

9–12 256 295 115% 

9–12 2,262 1,949 86% 

9–12 2,040 1,535 75% 

9–12 240 257 107% 

Totals 4,798 4,036 84.1% 

K–5 865 705 81%** 

Charter Schools 

Wilder’s Preparatory Academy Charter 

22 336 E. Spruce Avenue 

K 

466 

830 N. La Brea Avenue 

1–8 

23 

Century Community Charter School 

901 S. Maple Street 

6–7 264 

24 

Animo Leadership High Charter School 

1071 West Arbor Vitae Street 

9–12 511 

25 

Animo Inglewood High Charter School 

3425 Manchester Boulevard 

9–12 523 

Totals 1,764 

SOURCE: Sage Institute Inc., 2006. Inglewood Unified School District CBED Enrollment/Capacities by School 

Site. 

* Capacity for MTYRE used for year round scheduled schools 

** SOURCE: California Department of Education 

(http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ASPGraph1.asp?cYear=2005- 

06&Level=School&cName=CENTURY^PARK^ELEMENTARY^^^^^^^&cCode=6016414&dCode=196 

4733) 

YR = year round TS = traditional schedule 

All schools will operate on a Traditional Calendar in 2006-07 


4.1-3


Private Schools in Inglewood 

According to the California Department of Education, there are 14 private schools 

located within the City 42 . Private schools offer a range of educational opportunities for 

their students, ranging from pre-school and kindergarten care all the way through high 

school. Most private schools charge tuition, set their own admission standards, 

curriculum and graduation requirements, with an emphasis on preparing its graduates for 

college. Some, but not all private schools are affiliated with various religious groups. 

Table 4.1-2 lists the private schools located within Inglewood, and the grade range that 

they serve. 

The Los Angeles Unified School District operates one school within the City of 

Inglewood, Century Park Elementary School. This elementary school serves students that 

reside within the City, but is operated and under the control of the Los Angeles Unified 

School District. 

Table 4.1-2 Private Schools within Inglewood 

Map 

No. School Name Address Grades 

26 Academy for Early Learning 1014–1020 N. Park Ave. Daycare: PK–K 

27 Calvary Christian Elementary 2400 West 85th St. Grades: K–8 

28 Children's Enrichment Center 3209 West Manchester Blvd. Daycare: PK–2 

29 COPE Academy of Learning& People 3320 W. 85th St Grades: K–9 

30 

Crusaders Christian Pre-School & 

Kindergarten 

601 Centinela Ave. Daycare: PK–K 

31 Debbie's Child Care Development 521 South Osage Ave. Daycare: PK–K 

32 First Lutheran Preschool 600 West Queen St. Daycare: PK–K 

33 From the Heart Preschool 1061 E. Hyde Park Blvd. Daycare: PK–K 

34 Kids' Castle Child Care Center 745 North La Brea Ave. Daycare: PK–K 

35 Saint Mary's Academy 701 Grace Ave Grades: 9–12 

36 South Bay Lutheran High School 3600 West Imperial Highway Grades: 7–12 

37 St. John Chrysostom Elementary School 530 East Florence Ave. Grades: K–8 

38 The University of Children 1512 Centinela Ave. Grades: PK–3 

39 Wiz Schools 121 West Arbor Vitae Grades: PK–3 

SOURCE: California Private School Directory (http://www.cde.ca.gov) Accessed March 13, 2006. 

42 California Department of Education, 2006. Website: 

http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/sd/results.asp?Nocache=4%2F12%2F2006+8%3A56%3A51+AM, accessed 

March 20, 2006. 

4.1-4 


N MARKET ST 

S MARKET ST 

CULLEN WY 

S LA CIENEGA BLVD 

CLUB DR 

S ASH AV 

S OSAGE AV 



SCHOOL LOCATIONS 

AVIATION BLVD 

5 

! 

S ISIS AV 

W 64TH ST 

W OLIVE ST 

S HINDRY AV 

24 

! 


Los Angeles 

S GLASGOW AV 

10 

! 

W 64TH PL 


W ELLIS AV 


CENTINELA AV 

W HILL ST 

%&l( 

38 

! 

W VICTOR AV 

W FLORENCE AV 

W REGENT ST 

W QUEEN ST 

W OLIVE ST 

W KELSO ST 

W PLYMOUTH ST 

32 

! 

W VENICE WY 



W LIME ST 

11 

! 


W ELM AV 

W SPRUCE AV 

W MAGNOLIA AV 



S OAK ST 

19 

! 

S HOLLY ST 

W 96TH ST 

W 97TH ST 

W 98TH ST 

W 99TH ST 

Inglewood Unified School District 

Elementary Schools 

1 

2 

3 

!!! 

4 

5 

6 

!!! 

7 

! 

8 

!! 

9 

! 

10 

11 

12 

13 

!!! 

6 

! 

N OAK ST 

S ROSEWOOD AV 

S EUCALYPTUS AV 

S TRURO AV 

N LA BREA AV 

22 

! 

34 


N FIR AV 

S FIR AV 

W IVY AV 

S WALNUT ST 

S GREVILLEA AV 

S MAPLE AV 

S BURIN AV 

S LA BREA AV 

E HARGRAVE ST 

E BRETT ST 


HYDE PARK PL 

E STEPNEY ST 

S HAWTHORNE BLVD 

E HAZEL ST 

S ORCHARD DR 

E WARREN LN 

S LOCUST ST 

E SPRUCE AV 

S LARCH ST 

30 

! 

E TAMARACK AV 

S MYRTLE AV 

35 

! 

E FLORENCE AV 

E GRACE AV 

E REGENT ST 

14 

! 

7 

17 20 

! !! 

22 

! 

9 

16 

31 

! ! 

1 

! 

39 

! 23 

L o s A n g e l e s C o u n t y 

Beulah Payne Elementary School 

Monroe Junior High School 

High Schools 

16 

17 

18 

!!! 

! 19 

Centinela Elementary School 

L o s A n g e l e s C o u n t y 

Clyde Woodworth Elementary School 

Daniel Freeman Elementary School 

Frank Parent Elementary School 

Highland Elementary School 

Hudnall Elementary School 

Bennet/Kew Elementary School 

Kelso Elementary School 

La Tijera Elementary School 

Oak Street Elementary School 

Warren Lane Elementary School 

Worthington Elementary School 

Middle Schools 

14 G W Crozier School 

!! 

15 

Hillcrest High School 

Inglewood High School 

Morningside High School 

City Honors High School 

Lennox 

Source: City of Inglewood, February 2006, 

California Private School Directory (http://www.cde.ca.gov), March 16, 2006 

Date: August 8, 2006 

N:\GISProjects\Inglewood-11146\schools.mxd 

City of Hawthorne 

Adult School 

20 

! 

E KELSO ST 

W 101ST ST 

N PARK AV 

N PRAIRIE AV 

E QUEEN ST 

E LA BREA DR 


S FLOWER ST 

2 

! 

36 

! 

E AERICK ST 


S OSAGE AV 

W 103RD ST 

26 

! 

S PRAIRIE AV 

S PRAIRIE AV 


E BRETT ST 


E 65TH ST 


E HARDY ST 


W 102ND ST 

W 104TH ST 

W 105TH ST 

W 106TH ST 

W 107TH ST 

W 108TH ST 

W 109TH ST 

W 110TH ST 

W 111TH ST 

W 111TH PL 

W 112TH ST 

W 113TH ST 

KAREEM CT 

33 

! 

S DOTY AV 


E 66TH ST 

%&d( 

Los Angeles Unified School District 

! 21 

Century Park Elementary School 

W 64TH ST 

WEST BLVD 

REDONDO BLVD 

Hollywood 

Park 

Lake 

YUKON AV 

WEST BLVD 

13 

! 

37 

! 

W 116TH ST 

W 117TH ST 

W 118TH ST 

W 118TH PL 

W 74TH ST 

VICTORIA AV 

PINCAY DR 

LUTHER LN 

POETS LN 

18 

! 

S CHERRY AV 

W 79TH ST 

W 81ST ST 

W 82ND ST 

W 82ND PL 

W 83RD ST 

W 84TH PL 

S DEHN AV 

8 

! 

25 

! 

S LEMOLI AV 


Los Angeles 

S 12TH AV 

11TH AV 

S 11TH AV 

S 10TH AV 

S 10TH AV 

S SIMMS AV 

S 8TH AV 

! 29 

28 

3 

! 

15 

! 

CRENSHAW BLVD 

W 76TH ST 

W 77TH ST 

W 78TH ST 

W 78TH PL 

W 79TH ST 

W 80TH ST 

W 81ST ST 

W 82ND ST 

W 84TH ST 

W 84TH PL 

W 85TH ST 

W 88TH ST 

W 90TH ST 

S 8TH AV 

ATKINSON AV 

[ 

12 

! 

S 6TH AV 

ARDATH AV 

WILKIE AV 

S 5TH AV 

W 104TH ST 

W 108TH ST 

S 5TH AV 

4 

! 

W 101ST ST 

S 4TH AV 

S 3RD AV 

THOREAU ST 

W 111TH ST 

W 112TH ST 


MAITLAND AV 

S BYRD AV 

S 2ND AV 

1 

! 

S SPINNING AV 

W 115TH ST 

S VAN NESS AV 

27 

! 

S VAN NESS AV 

City of Los Angeles 

L o s 

An g e l e s 

C o u n t y 

Crusaders Christian Preschool 

Charter Schools 

! 22 31 Debbie's Child Care Development 

Wilder's Prep Academy Charter 

! 23 32 First Lutheran Preschool 

Century Community Charter School 

! 24 33 From the Heart Preschool 

Animo Leadership High Charter School 

! 25 34 Kids' Castle Child Care Center 

Animo Inglewood High Charter School 

35 

Private Schools 

Saint Mary's Academy 

26 Academy for Early Learning 

36 South Bay Lutheran High School 

27 

28 

29 

!!!! 

Inglewood Adult School 

Calvary Christian Elementary School 

Children's Enrichment Center 

COPE Academy of Learning 

! 30 

! 

!!!!!!!! 

37 

38 

39 

St. John Chrysostom 

The University of Children 

Wiz Schools 

Miles 

0 0.25 

0.5 

Figure 4.1-1

4.1 Schools 

Educational Programs 

The Curriculum Guide Blue Print is the Inglewood Unified School District's 

comprehensive guide for implementing the California Department of Education Content 

Standards. The Curriculum Guide Blue Print is designed to clearly define what is to be 

taught within each subject matter and at each grade level. Each component is a building 

block in constructing a sequential, coherent, comprehensive and balanced educational 

program. The layout of the Curriculum Guide Blue Print allows teachers to readily review 

the content standards. The subjects are arranged in alphabetical order, as follows: 

English-Language Arts, English Language Development, Health, History/Social Science, 

Mathematics, Physical Education, Science, Visual and Performing Arts, and Vocational 

Education. With the exception of Vocational Education, each subject matter is further 

subdivided by grade spans (K–2, 3–5, 6–8, and 9–12). 

Consistent with the California Content standards and the California Frameworks, each 

strand or major theme is clearly indicated across the grade span. The organization of the 

Curriculum Guide Blue Print mirrors the organization of the California Department of 

Education documents as much as possible so as to facilitate cross-referencing for the 

user. 43 

Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) 

The number of identified GATE students within the Inglewood Unified School District 

has increased from 895 in the 2003/04 school year to 942 in the 2004/05 school year 44 . 

This increase is due to the District’s heightening attention to the screening and 

identification process. The students in the GATE program are serviced through 

enrichment activities, cluster grouping, and accelerated classes. School site facilitators 

ensure the identification and differentiated instruction of GATE students. 45 

UCLA/National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student 

Testing (CRESST) 

The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) has partnered with the National 

Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) to develop 

rigorous, standards-based performance assignments in English/Language Arts and 

Mathematics for students grades 4 through 11. These assignments measure the deep 

understanding and complex skills as represented in the California standards. The 

CRESST mission focuses on the assessment of educational quality, addressing persistent 

problems in the design and use of assessment systems to serve multiple purposes. The 

prime focus of the English/Language Arts segment of the program is the Inglewood 

43 Inglewood Unified School District. 2006. http://inglewood.k12.ca.us/Curriculum-Staff-Developmentand-Categorical-Programs.htm. 

accessed March 15. 

44 Inglewood Unified School District, 2005. Status Report on Board and Superintendent Goals, January 26. 

45 Inglewood Unified School District. 2006. http://inglewood.k12.ca.us/Curriculum-Staff-Developmentand-Categorical-Programs.htm. 



4.1-7


Language Arts Performance Assignment (ILAP). The ILAP assignments are designed to 

achieve grade appropriate reading comprehension, literary response and analysis and 

writing APPLICATIONS standards. The Inglewood Mathematics Performance 

Assignment (IMAP) focuses primarily on grade appropriate number sense and 

mathematical reasoning standards in grades 4 through 6 and on Geometry and Algebra 

standards in later grades. 46 

Special Education 

The Special Education Department provides services to students who qualify as 

individuals with exceptional needs. The Inglewood Unified School District (IUSD) is 

required by the State of California and the federal government to serve these students in 

specially designed classrooms with teachers who are credentialed in the appropriate 

special education areas. Special education services offered within IUSD schools include 

the following classroom settings 47 : 

• Resource Specialist Program (RSP)—Students who experience learning difficulties in 

one or more subject areas (as measured by formal assessments and identified in 

their IEP’s) are part of the Resource Specialist Program (RSP). These students 

attend general education classes and are taught by credentialed special education 

teachers in the deficit subject area. There are RSP programs at all Inglewood 

schools. 

• Special Day Class (SDC)—Students who are learning handicapped or have other 

handicapping conditions are taught in Special Day Class (SDC) and can be 

mainstreamed into general education as specified by their Individualized Education 

Plan (IEP). There are SDC classes at all Inglewood schools. 

• Severely Handicapped (SH) students are developmentally delayed as measured by 

formal assessments and identified in their IEP’s. Their delays range from mild to 

severe. They are usually taught in an SH classroom. The Inglewood Unified School 

District has Severely Handicapped programs at the Child Development Center 

(pre-K), Daniel Freeman Elementary School, Woodworth Elementary School, 

Monroe Middle School, and Morningside High School. 

Other types of Special Education services are offered to students with the following 

handicapping conditions: Severely Emotionally disturbed, Emotionally disturbed, Blind, 

Deaf, Multiple Handicaps, Autism, and Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD). 

These students are served in IUSD schools, LACOE schools, or Southwest SELPA 

schools. If the student’s condition is of such severity that IUSD cannot serve them in the 

above schools, the student may be referred to a nonpublic school. 

46 Ibid. 

47 Inglewood Unified School District. 2006. http://inglewood.k12.ca.us/Departments/Instructional- 

Services-Division/Special-Education/special-education-department.htm. accessed March 15. 

4.1-8 


4.1 Schools 

Inglewood Community Adult School 

The Inglewood Community Adult School, is dedicated to promoting students’ success 

through quality service and excellence by providing learning opportunities for adult 

learners. 

Inglewood Community Adult School offers a variety of classes including English as a 

Second Language (ESL), word processing, high school diploma subjects, conversational 

Spanish, older adult subjects, computer technology, secretarial sciences, vocational 

education courses, and cosmetology. Classes are offered at more than 15 locations 

throughout the city. 48 

Planned Improvements 

The following is a list of recent and proposed improvements to the schools of the 

Inglewood Unified School District. Staff is also working on Modernization Applications, 

Modernization Reimbursements, Facility Hardship and other financial resources which 

may be used to augment Measure K Projects (Measure K described under Regulatory 

Setting of this Section). The long-term plan is to replace the one-story classroom facilities 

with two-story buildings on each school site except for kindergarden sites, in order to 

create more open space for play areas on the ground and improve school sites. 49 As 

school enrollment declines, however, so does the amount of money the school district 

can receive from the State towards construction. In 2005, the decline in enrollment 

resulted in a $28 million loss in eligibility for State matching funds to supplement 

elementary school projects. Details of the planned improvements for each area are 

described below. 50 Currently there are no plans for new school construction within the 

City at this time. 

• The District is completing a State Facility Hardship application for replacement for 

Crozier Middle School. New construction at Crozier Middle School will result in a 

two-story, six-building complex containing 44 classrooms, science and art labs, a 

gymnasium, an administration building, a library/multimedia center, a cafeteriastyle 

kitchen, an amphitheater, a covered lunch shelter, and sports fields. The new 

school is designed for 1,300 students, grades 6–8. 

• A new building for the consolidated offices at Morningside High School, including 

a parent conference room, was completed in winter of 2006. 

• Construction plans for Highland Elementary School include a new, two-story, 29- 

classroom building with a new playground. The administration building will also be 

modernized as a part of the improvement project. Construction began in winter of 

2006. 

48 Inglewood Unified School District. 2006. http://www.iusd.net/schools/adult-school/index.htm. 

Accessed March 15. 

49 Vail, Jennifer, 2006. Sage Institute Inc. Personal communication. 4 August. 

50 Inglewood Unified School District. 2006. http://iusd.net/Departments/Business-Services- 

Division/Measure-K/MeasureK/Projects/index.htm, accessed March 13. 


4.1-9


• Monroe Middle School serves students in grades 6 to 8. A proposal to construct a 

new two-story facility, which would include a gymnasium with locker rooms and a 

stage, a kitchen and ampitheater-style lunch area, and three classrooms on the 

second floor was presented to the Board of Education in June 2005. 

• Warren Lane Elementary School serves students in grades K–8. A proposal for the 

use of new construction on the eastern side of the site to divide the current campus 

into two sections: a K–5 campus on the 6th Street side and a 6–8 campus on the 

8th Street side of the site. The proposed new construction includes a new two-story 

14-classroom building, four new labs, a library, a gymnasium, a kitchen, and an 

administration facility. 

• La Tijera Elementary School serves students in grades K–8. The District has been 

approved through the State Facility Hardship Program to replace La Tijera 

Elementary School as the school has several structurally compromised and 

abandoned buildings. The IUSD plans to complete the La Tijera project using 

funds from Measure K, Faculty Hardship funds and the State of California. 

• Hudnall Elementary School currently serves students in grades K–6. Expansion 

plans for Hudnall Elementary School include a new two story, 12-classroom 

building. The administration building will be modernized, the portable classrooms 

removed, and the playground resurfaced as a part of the project. The anticipated 

start date for construction is spring of 2006. 

• Beulah Payne Elementary School currently serves students in grades K–6. 

Construction plans for Payne Elementary School include a new two-story, 15- 

classroom building. The school will also undergo modernization upgrades, 10 

portable classrooms will be removed, and the playground will be resurfaced as part 

of the project. The anticipated start date for construction is summer of 2006. 

Enrollment Projections 

Table 4.1-3 below provides existing and projected enrollments through 2010/11. Existing 

and projected enrollments include the four charter schools within District boundaries, 

described above. As shown in the table, IUSD, including the charter schools, is 

experiencing a decline in attendance district wide at the elementary school level. This 

decline, according to the District, may be due in part to the economy, and correlates with 

population cohorts as opposed to birth rates. 51 Projections in the table are based on 

internal growth only, however, and do not include growth from new residential 

construction in the City. Due to the future development expected to occur in the 

Renaissance Home development and Hollywood Park area, District enrollment levels are 

expected to increase with the increase in population 52 . For each new residential 

development project in the City, state law requires developers to pay a statutory school 

facilities fee to the City of Inglewood, which would be distributed to the District. 

Payment of the fee would assist the District in expanding the necessary school facilities or 

services, as necessary, to accommodate increased enrollment. 

51 Vail, Jennifer, 2006. Sage Institute Inc. Personal communication. 4 August. 

52 Inglewood Unified School District, 2005. Bard Summit on the Measure K Construction Program and 

State Eligibility, February 26. 

4.1-10 


4.1 Schools 

Table 4.1-3 

Inglewood Unified School District Alternative Enrollment Projections 

Based on Adjusted Matriculation October 2005 (CBEDs) 

K–12 Enrollments within District Boundaries 

CBED Enrollment Data 4 Matriculated Enrollment Projections 1,2,3,4 

Grade Level 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 

Grade K 1,362 1,421 1,255 1,155 1,163 1,171 1,179 1,188 1,196 

Grade 1 1 1,641 1,583 1,561 1,402 1,326 1,322 1,332 1,341 1,350 

Grade 2 1,552 1,569 1,450 1,439 1,412 1,336 1,332 1,341 1,350 

Grade 3 1,550 1,537 1,520 1,363 1,449 1,422 1,345 1,341 1,350 

Grade 4 1,542 1,525 1,472 1,445 1,373 1,459 1,432 1,354 1,350 

Grade 5 1,470 1,569 1,446 1,421 1,455 1,382 1,469 1,442 1,364 

Grade 6 1,612 1,527 1,647 1,476 1,431 1,465 1,392 1,480 1,452 

Grade 7 1,424 1,529 1,338 1,515 1,486 1,441 1,476 1,402 1,490 

Grade 8 1,249 1,335 1,396 1,246 1,526 1,497 1,451 1,486 1,411 

Grade 9 1,314 1,233 1,310 1,315 1,255 1,536 1,507 1,461 1,496 

Grade 10 2 1,242 1,280 1,204 1,286 1,285 1,226 1,501 1,473 1,428 

Grade 11 2 911 1,089 1,145 1,101 1,154 1,152 1,100 1,346 1,321 

Grade 12 2 672 792 904 907 922 966 965 920 1,127 

Elementary Sub-Totals 

Grades K–6 10,729 10,731 10,351 9,701 9,609 9,558 9,481 9,486 9,413 

Grades 7–8 2,673 2,864 2,734 2,761 3,012 2,938 2,927 2,887 2,901 

Elem. SDC 416 393 425 396 399 402 404 407 410 

Total K–8 13,818 13,988 13,510 12,858 13,020 12,897 12,812 12,781 12,725 

Secondary Sub-Totals 

Grades 9–12 4,139 4,394 4,563 4,609 4,615 4,880 5,072 5,200 5,372 

Cont. High 165 182 186 295 297 299 301 303 305 

Sec. SDC 171 205 177 166 167 168 170 171 172 

Total 9–12 4,475 4,781 4,926 5,070 5,079 5,348 5,543 5,675 5,849 

GRAND TOTALS 

Grades K–8 13,818 13,988 13,510 12,858 13,020 12,897 12,812 12,781 12,725 

Total 9–12 4,475 4,781 4,926 5,070 5,079 5,348 5,543 5,675 5,849 

Total K–12 18,293 18,769 18,436 17,928 18,098 18,244 18,355 18,456 18,574 

1Due to Pre-K private schools within District boundaries an average annual increase of 13% occurs from Kindergarten to 1st 

grade. Therefore, projected 1st grade enrollments include an annual increase of 13% from Kindergarten to 1st grade. 

2Projected High School enrollments include a 3% annual dropout rate from 9th to 10th grade, a 11% annual dropout rate 

from 10th to 11th grade and a 17% annual dropout rate from 11th to 12th grade. 

3Based on historical and projected population and enrollment trends an average annual growth rate of 0.7% was included in 

the above enrollment projections. 

4Existing CBED enrollments for 2002-03 through 2005-06 and projected enrollments for 2006-07 through 2010-11 include 

enrollments attending and projected for four (4) Charter Schools within District Boundaries; Inglewood Preparatory, 

Century Community, Animo Leadership High and Animo Inglewood High. 

• Funding 

To accommodate planned improvements, IUSD funds new school facilities through a 

combination of several sources, including State bonds, local bonds, special taxes, 

developer fees, and various federal funding sources. The Inglewood Unified School 


4.1-11


District also uses multi-track, year-round education as a way to avoid or defer the cost of 

new construction. 

State Sources 

The major State funding program for providing permanent school facilities is the Leroy 

F. Greene State School Building Lease-Purchase Program of 1976 (Lease-Purchase 

Program), which is funded by State bonds. These bonds are placed on the ballot by the 

legislature on a regular basis for approval by voters. In 2000, adoption of Proposition 39 

changed the required majority for local voter approval of bonds from two-thirds to 

55 percent. Once these bonds receive voter approval, school districts may apply for the 

funds. Eligibility is based on a district’s need to house current, as well as projected, 

enrollment. The Lease-Purchase Modernization Program is an affiliated program that 

provides funds for improvements to enhance facilities at least 30 years old. 

Another source of State funding is the School Facility Program or Assembly Bill 16 

(AB16), administered by the State Office of New Public School Construction In 2002, 

Assembly Bill 16 created the Critically Overcrowded School Facilities (COS) program, 

which supplements the new construction provisions within the School Facilities Program. 

The COS program allows school districts with critically overcrowded school facilities, as 

determined by the California Department of Education, to apply for a preliminary 

apportionment for new construction projects. 53 As of the 2004/05 school year both 

Beulah Payne Elementary School and W. Claude Hudnall Elementary School were eligible 

for COS funding. 

Levels of developer fee contribution are determined by the State Allocation Board and 

increase annually. Current State statutes dictate that school districts have the authority to 

levy statutory or Level I fees on new development at rates of $2.14 per square foot of 

new residential and $0.34 per square foot for commercial and industrial development. 54 

Because these Level I fees often do not generate sufficient funding for new schools, 

districts such as the Inglewood Unified School District use fees Level II fees to generate 

one-half the cost of providing new school facilities. Use of Level II fees assumes that the 

State will provide the other half of the cost of new schools through the issuance of 

general obligation bonds. 

In the event that the State does not have funding available, participating districts have the 

option to temporarily increase the fees to Level III fees on new residential development 

to try and meet their needs if the district meets certain conditions such as having 

20 percent of the district’s classrooms classified as relocatable. The district must, 

however, refund these funds when general obligation funds from the State do become 

available. It should also be noted that some income for school districts is obtained 

53 California Department of Education. Facilities Department, . Website: www.cde.ca.gov/facilities, March 

21, 2006. 

54 State Allocation Board, 2004. Website: www.opsc.dgs.ca.gov/SAB/Default.htm, Accessed March 21, 

2006. 

4.1-12 


4.1 Schools 

through the State lottery but cannot be used for funding construction projects due to the 

fluctuating funding levels available through this means. 

Local Sources 

Local funding sources include both non-revenue and revenue monies. Non-revenue 

funds include lease/purchases, certificates of participation, and other mechanisms 

typically in the form of loans. Revenue funds are generated from several sources, 

including the IUSD’s general fund, money from the sale of unused school sites, general 

obligation funds, redevelopment agreement funds, developer fees, and others. 

After land is acquired, school districts are exempt from local zoning regulations and 

planning processes. But the construction of new schools, like all development, is 

dependent upon multiple factors, most basically the availability of funds. Also, without 

support from the City itself, available funding does not guarantee new facilities will be 

built. It is also important to note that increases in the tax base do not necessarily affect 

the financial status of the school districts. Thus, a strong local economy does not 

necessarily mean that new school facilities will be built and that programs will be 

expanded. Further, other operating expenses that continually increase, such as salaries, 

can significantly decrease an already limited budget and eliminate opportunities for new 

development. 

Measure K Bonds 

In 1998, the residents of Inglewood and Ladera Heights passed a $131 million bond issue 

to fund the upgrade and modernization of Inglewood Unified School District schools. In 

Inglewood Unified School District Board of Education voted to approve the realignment 

of remaining Measure K bond funds for the construction and modernization of 

Inglewood schools. This realignment allowed the district to prioritize projects that were 

eligible for matching State funds as well as compensate for the loss of State funds due to 

enrollment decreases at the elementary school level. The realignment reduces the number 

of schools to receive new construction and modernization from Measure K funds. 

However, many of those schools are to benefit from noise mitigation upgrades from the 

recently-signed LAX Community Benefits agreement. Maintenance funds will be used to 

address remaining needs, which are currently being assessed in a district-wide study. 55 

The LAX School Benefits Agreement 

A milestone agreement reached in December of 2004 provides for facility upgrades to 

schools affected by airplane noise and other airplane-related environmental factors. The 

LAX School Benefits Agreement, negotiated in conjunction with community groups as a 

part of the LAX Modernization plan, would provide up to $118 million for facility 

55 

Inglewood Unified School District, 2006. Measure K News, Website: 

http://iusd.net/Departments/Business-Services-Division/Measure- 

K/MeasureK/News/2005/March/Realignment.htm, accessed March 20, 2006. 


4.1-13


upgrades at schools in the flight corridor. This is the largest amount of money that will be 

received by any school district from the Federal Aviation Administration. 

Inglewood Educational Foundation 

The Inglewood Educational Foundation, founded May 12, 1998, is a nonprofit 

organization dedicated to improvement and enrichment of educational opportunities for 

students within the Inglewood Unified School District. The primary purpose of the 

Foundation is to provide college scholarships and supplemental financial support for a 

variety of programs that directly benefit students and teachers in the classroom. 

The Inglewood Educational Foundation supports academic enhancement programs, 

scholarships to institutions of higher education, cultural and social awareness, mini-grants 

for teachers, and mini-grants for special programs. 56 

• Issues 

• Based on the 2005/06 school enrollment levels, three of the 20 schools in the 

District are operating above capacity, including Beulah Payne Elementary School 

(104 percent), Hillcrest Continuation High School (115 percent), and City Honors 

High School (107 percent). While plans are in place for improvement of Beulah 

Payne Elementary School, no plans have been identified for Hillcrest Continuation 

or City Honors High Schools. 

• There is a demonstrated need for preschools in the Inglewood District, as indicated 

by waiting lists. 57 

• District enrollments are expected to increase in the Hollywood Park area and 

related attendance boundaries. 58 

• As stated above, school enrollments are expected to increase, but there are no plans 

to construct new schools to meet these future needs. 


California Department of Education. 2006. Website: 

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/co/documents/coscert.xls. March 20. 

——. 2006. Website: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/yr/direct04.asp. March 20. 

——. 2006. Website: www.cde.ca.gov/facilities, March 21. 

——. 2006. Website: http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ASPGraph1.asp?cYear=2005- 

06&Level=School&cName=CENTURY^PARK^ELEMENTARY^^^^^^^&cCode 

=6016414&dCode=1964733, March 21 

California Office of Public School Construction. 2006. Website: 

http://www.opsc.dgs.ca.gov/default.htm, March 21. 

56 Inglewood Unified School District. 2006. http://inglewood.k12.ca.us/E-F-P.htm. accessed March 15. 

57 Inglewood Unified School District. 2005. Bard Summit on the Measure K Construction Program and 

State Eligibility, February 26. 

58 Ibid. 

4.1-14 


4.1 Schools 

Inglewood Unified School District, 2005. Bard Summit on the Measure K Construction 

Program and State Eligibility, February 26. 

——. 2005. Status Report on Board and Superintendent Goals, January 26. 

——. 2006. Website: http://www.iusd.net/schools/adult-school/index.htm. Accessed 

March 15. 

——. 2006. Website: http://iusd.net/Departments/Business-Services- 


——. 2006. Website: http://inglewood.k12.ca.us/Curriculum-Staff-Development-and- 

Categorical-Programs.htm. accessed March 15. 

——. 2006. Website: http://inglewood.k12.ca.us/Departments/Instructional-Services- 

Division/Special-Education/special-education-department.htm, accessed March 15,. 

——. 2006. Website: http://inglewood.k12.ca.us/E-F-P.htm. accessed March 15. 

——. 2006. Measure K News, Website: http://iusd.net/Departments/Business-Services- 

Division/Measure-K/MeasureK/News/2005/March/Realignment.htm, accessed 

March 20, 2006. 

——. 2006. Website: http://iusd.net/Departments/Business-Services- 


Sage Institute Incorporated, 2006. Inglewood Unified School District Alternative Enrollment 

Projections. 7 August. 

State Allocation Board. 2006. Website: www.opsc.dgs.ca.gov/SAB/Default.htm, 

Accessed March 21. 

Vail, Jennifer. 2006. Sage Institute Incorporated. 


4.1-15

4.2 Recreation and Parks 

4.2 RECREATION AND PARKS 

Parklands are important land use components in an urban environment, providing both 

visual relief from the built environment and contributing to quality of life through 

recreation and aesthetic value. This section describes the City’s existing parkland and 

recreation centers, identifies planned expansions and improvements, and outlines current 

needs and future issues. Information for this section is based upon information provided 

by the General Plan Open Space Element, updated in 1995, and discussions with the 

Department of Parks, Recreation and Community Services staff. Additional information 

reviewed in preparation of this section included information obtained from the City of 

Inglewood’s official website and the Department of Parks, Recreation and Community 

Services Recovery Action Program (RAP) for the City of Inglewood’s Park System (2002) 

document. 


The Department of Parks, Recreation and Community Services is responsible for 

providing maintenance on city parks , as well as parkways, center medians, islands, and 

trees on City property. 59 The Department is currently divided into four divisions: Parks 

Administration, Recreation and Cultural Services, Human Services and Community 

Services. The following is a brief description of the duties and services provided by each 

division: 

• Parks Administration: Responsible for maintenance of City parks and landscaping 

of City Property 

• Recreation and Cultural Services: Responsible for providing programs and activities 

at the City’s parks and recreation facilities and Citywide special events 

• Human Services: Responsible for providing services such as food distribution 

programs, senior citizen services and other programs designed to improve the 

quality of life for the City’s residents and 

• Community Services: Responsible for community beautification and fostering 

neighborhood preservation, including code enforcement and graffiti abatement 

Approximately 100 acres of open space, including parks, medians, and parkways is 

located within Inglewood. The City also has two recreation centers that provide a variety 

of parks and recreational opportunities in the community. Figure 4.2-1 identifies the park 

and recreational facilities in the City and corresponds to Table 4.2-1 which lists each park 

with corresponding acreage and available facilities. 

Parks 

All ten of Inglewood’s parks are defined as neighborhood parks by the City. It should be 

noted that all of the City’s parks were acquired prior to 1971. 

59 Inglewood, City of, “Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department 2004 Annual Report,” 2004 


4.2-1


Proposed Facilities 

Due to Inglewood’s highly developed urban environment, limited opportunities for new 

parkland are available within the community. Although the City recognizes that land 

acquired in the southern and southwestern parts of the City with aircraft mitigation funds 

should be explored for recreational opportunities, there is limited land suitable for such 

acquisition 60 . However, the community has been active in providing additional and 

improved recreational facilities within existing parks. 61 Several ongoing capital 

improvement projects for the City’s park system are scheduled for completion during 

fiscal year 2005-2006. Recent and proposed improvements include the following: 

• In May 2005, the City’s first skatepark opened at Darby Park, and two additional 

skateparks at Rogers Park and Ed Vincent Park opened in April 2006. Other capital 

improvement projects include the replacement of playground equipment at North 

and Queen Park, as well as Lockhaven Community Center; the resurfacing of the 

basketball courts at Siminski and Vincent Parks; and construction of ADA 

compliant restrooms at Vincent Park. Additional improvements and repairs to the 

City’s parks are scheduled for initiation in the 2005-2006 fiscal year. 

• The Helen Lundeberg “History of Transportation” Mural Restoration and 

Relocation Project is scheduled for completion in fall 2006. The mural, a cast 

concrete and terrazzo paneled mural wall composed of 60 panels, is 8 feet high and 

240 feet long, is awaiting the construction of a new wall in the Grevillea Art Park, 

where the mural will be relocated. The groundbreaking ceremony occurred on 

November 5, 2005, and a Re-dedication Event is planned for the fall of 2006. 

• Construction is scheduled to start in fall 2006 on the Locust Street 

Intergenerational Center and Housing Complex. Along with construction of 58 

units of senior housing, the new complex will replace the current Senior Citizens 

Center with a 33,122 square-foot, state of the art, ADA compliant Senior Center. 62 

Recreational Facilities 

As described in Table 4.2-1, the City’s parks contain a variety of recreational facilities, 

with areas available for organized sports, including soccer/football fields, baseball 

diamonds, tennis courts, volleyball courts, handball courts, and basketball courts. 

The City also offers opportunities for informal recreation activities with benches, picnic 

tables and barbecues available at several City parks. Additionally, the 

recreational/community centers offer a wide variety of recreational activities, including 

self-defense classes, music, art, dance, games, boxing, and weight training. The pool 

complex in Ed Vincent Park is the only public swimming facility in the City. 

60 Inglewood, City of, “Recovery Action Program for the City of Inglewood’s Park System,” December 

2002 

61 Diana P. Andrade. Email with City, March 13, 2006. 

62 Danita Meshack-Maden. Email with City, March 21, 2006 

4.2-2 




PARKS AND RECREATION CENTERS 

Legend 

1 

Ashwood Park 

7 

North Park 

2 

Center Park 

8 

Queen Park 

3 

Circle Park 

9 

Rogers Park 

4 

Darby Park 

10 

Siminski Park 

5 

Edward Vincent Jr. Park 

1 

Lockhaven Community Center 

6 

Grevillea Park 

2 

Inglewood Senior Citizen’s Center 



Miles 


Figure 4.2-1


Table 4.2-1 

Parks 

Map No Name Address Acres Equipment and Facilities 

Parks 

1 

Ashwood 

Park 

2 Center Park 

3 Circle Park 

4 Darby Park 

201 South Ash 

Avenue 

3660 West 

111 th Street 

8300 Fifth 

Avenue 

3400 West 

Arbor Vitae 

Street 

1.3 

1.2 

• 2 playgrounds 

• 2 tennis courts 

• 1 full basketball court 

• 1 volleyball court 

• 2 picnic areas 

• 1 wading pool. 

• 1 playground 

• 1 multi-purpose playing field. 

1.3 • Tree lined circular-shaped park 

14 



• 1 paddle tennis court 

• 4 half-basketball courts 

• 1 outdoor handball court 

• 2 lighted softball/football/soccer fields 

• Wading pool 

• Skatepark 


• Proposed water feature 

• 20,900 sf, ADA-compliant multi-purpose 

recreational building 

› Gymnasium/full basketball court 

› Weight room 

› Sauna 

› Meeting rooms 

› Pool room 

› Snack bar/kitchen 

› Park offices. 


4.2-5


Table 4.2-1 

Parks 


5 

6 

Edward 

Vincent Jr. 

Park 

Grevillea 

Park 

7 North Park 

8 Queen Park 

700 Warren 

Lane 

231 South 

Grevillea 

Avenue 

625 East 

Hargrave Street 

652 East Queen 

Street 

55 

1.5 

2.3 

1.1 



• 2 full basketball courts 

• 2 lighted and fenced softball fields 

• 2 lighted and fenced football/soccer 

fields 

• Skatepark 


• Pool complex consisting of 1 Olympic 

regulation swimming pool 

› 1 training pool 

› 1 wading pool 

› ADA-compliant bath house 

• Community playhouse 

• Multipurpose/Girl Scout facility 

• Outdoor Amphitheater. 

• History of Transportation Mural Project 

scheduled for rededication in fall 2006. 



• Picnic area. 

• Playground 

• Picnic area 


4.2-6 



Table 4.2-1 

Parks 


9 Rogers Park 

10 Siminski Park 

Community Centers 

1 

2 

Lockhaven 

Community 

Center 


Senior 

Citizen’s 

Center 

400 West 

Beach Avenue 

9717 


Avenue 

11125 Doty 

Avenue 

111 North 

Locust Street 

9 

1.9 

• 2 lighted tennis courts 

• Full basketball court 

• Lighted Little League baseball field 

• Lighted football/soccer field 


• Skatepark 

• Picnic area 

• Playground 

• 33,500 sf, multipurpose recreation 

building 

› Gymnasium/full basketball court 

› Auditorium for classes/productions 

› Portable boxing ring 

› Weight room 

› Pool room 

› Table tennis 

› Meeting rooms 

› Handball court 

› Snack bar/kitchen 

› Outdoor pre-school area 

› Park office 

› A skatepark is being planned for 

summer 2006 

• Full basketball court 


• 4,305 sf, ADA-compliant Community 

Center 

› Billiards 

› Weight training 

› Restrooms and offices 

• Residential house gifted to the City 

• Serves as a community center 

• With playground equipment 

• Recently renovated in 2005 

• 1 Community Center 

• Offices 

• Multipurpose room 

• Dining room 

• Kitchen 

• Restrooms 

• Billiards 

› New Senior Center is planned. 

33,000 sf, 2-story building 

SOURCE: City of Inglewood, Department of Parks Recreation and Community Services, 2006 

(http://www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/rec/parks_n_recreation/park_facilities/recreation_centers. 

asp) 


4.2-7


The Inglewood Unified School District playgrounds are gated, locked and unavailable for 

play during all but school hours, and then only for children of that school. The City has 

approached the School District to enact a comprehensive facilities joint use agreement, to 

further expand the recreational opportunities available to the residents of Inglewood. 63 

Private Regional Recreation Opportunities 

A major regional attraction located in Inglewood is The Forum, an 18,000 seat 

entertainment venue with a 3,500 on-site parking facility, is best known as the home of 

the Los Angeles Lakers and Kings until both teams moved to the Staples Center at the 

start of the 1999-2000 seasons respectively 64 . Forum Enterprises, Inc. purchased The 

Forum in December 2000. Dr. Kenneth C. Ulmer, is the President & CEO of Forum 

Enterprises, Inc. The Forum still provides a state of the art venue for a variety of uses 

including concerts, trade shows, sporting events, theatre productions, large conferences 

and conventions. Additionally, every Sunday, Dr. Ulmer hosts the Faithful Central Bible 

Church praise and worship service. 65 While no longer home to professional sports teams, 

The Forum is still an important recreation venue for the City of Inglewood and the 

Southern California region. 

Inglewood is also home to Hollywood Park, one of the West Coast’s first thoroughbred 

horse racing venues. First opened in 1938, the 240-acre Hollywood Park consists of the 

main racing facility; which includes the main and infield turf tracks, the infield lakes, and 

north park, that includes a large all-grass area with concessions and a playground for 

children, the paddock and the grandstands, turf club and press boxes. 66 

The Hollywood Park-Casino, a $20-million, state-of-the-art gaming complex, opened 

July 1, 1994. It is now operated by Pinnacle Entertainment Inc. (formerly Hollywood 

Park Inc.). The 24-hour facility features more than 150 live-action tables offering a variety 

of "California Casino Games. 67 " The site includes the Citation Restaurant, 300-seat sports 

lounge, a 24-hour health club, private karaoke suites, a professional massage center, 

beauty salon/barber shop, gift shop and meeting space for up to 2,000 guests. Live and 

simulcast wagering is offered at the Casino in the Finish Line Bar. 

Though not technically a recreation area, the Inglewood Park Cemetery encompasses a 

340-acre site within the City. The site provides open space and a quite scenic area in the 

City where people can walk, sit or enjoy peaceful reflection. People travel to Inglewood 

Park Cemetery to see the final resting place of several notable figures, including singer 

Ella Fitzgerald, boxing great Sugar Ray Robinson and several other notable figures from 

63 Inglewood, City of, “2005-2006 Annual Budget,” p. x. 

64 http://www.nba.com/lakers/history/lakers_history_new.html#35, accessed March 30, 2006. 

65 http://www.thelaforum.com/index1.html, accessed March 30, 2006 

66 http://www.hollywoodpark.com/visit/facilities.html, accessed March 30, 2006. 

67 California casinos are allowed by law to offer electronic gaming machines, blackjack, and other card 

games. Craps and roulette are not permitted, but some California casinos have modified these games to be 

played with cards rather than dice or roulette wheels. 

4.2-8 



the stage and screen to the halls of Washington, D.C., from the many fields of sports to 

the civic entrepreneurs of the South Bay area. 68 

The City also contains a wide range of private and/or commercial recreational facilities, 

many of which are offered to members, guests or students only. Examples include private 

gyms, bowling alleys, and swimming pools. Recreational facilities within multi-family 

developments also provide a variety of active and passive recreational opportunities for 

residents. 

Regional Park and Recreation Facilities 

Edward Vincent Jr. Park, within the City of Inglewood, is a 55-acre regional park, 

described above in Table 4.2-1. North of Inglewood is the Kenneth Hahn State 

Recreation Area, a regional park managed by the Los Angeles County Department of 

Parks and Recreation. The park includes large areas of native coastal sage scrub habitat, 

lawns and landscaped areas, picnic sites, four playgrounds, two baseball diamonds, a 

basketball court, tot lots, a fishing lake, lotus pond, and seven miles of trails. 

According to the results of the City of Inglewood Recovery Action Program Survey (2003), other 

nearby parks and recreational areas used by the residents of Inglewood include 69 Ladera 

Park, in Ladera Heights; St. Andrews Park, in Westchester; Lennox Park in Lennox; 

Baldwin Park in Los Angeles; El Dorado Park in Long Beach; and Griffith Park in Los 

Angeles. Other popular responses for recreation opportunities included Santa Monica 

State Beach, Manhattan Beach, and Malibu State Beach. 

Park Usage 

The National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) standard is five acres of parkland 

per 1,000 residents of “local or close to home open space.” Inglewood provides 0.8-acres 

of parkland per 1,000 residents, and due to the urbanized nature of the City, further 

acquisition of park lands is unlikely. Future increases in the City’s population will increase 

demand on existing parks and park facilities. The national standard, however, does not 

account for the open space provided within public schools and private arenas. While the 

City has not established its own standard ratio or goal of open space-to-population, there 

is less of a dependence upon public facilities in some parts of Inglewood due to the 

availability of non-public open space and recreation resources. 

According to the Recovery Action Program for the City of Inglewood’s Park System, northern and 

northeastern Inglewood are adequately served by parks having recreational facilities while 

the southern and southwestern neighborhoods are not served adequately by comparable 

facilities. These areas are densely populated with mostly apartments and have the greatest 

68 http://www.inglewoodparkcemetery.org/heritage.html 

69 Inglewood, City of, “Recovery Action Program for 2002-2003; Survey Results,” page 10. 


4.2-9


need for new parks and recreational facilities and should be given priority in the planning, 

acquisition and development of lands to resolve these park needs. 70 

Although NRPA standards are useful in determining a benchmark for appropriate 

allocations of recreational facilities, actual demand will vary from city to city. Inglewood is 

a built-out city with no significant vacant tracts of land, and must address recreational 

demand on an as-needed basis. Current opportunities include the reconfiguring of 

existing playing fields and recreational facilities and the development of new skateparks, 

expanding recreational programs to accommodate additional demand, and possible open 

space areas as the Hollywood Park Race Track is transitioned to a new land use over time. 

Recreational and Community Service Programs 

The four divisions of the Inglewood Department of Parks, Recreation and Community 

Services are Parks Administration, Recreation and Cultural Services, Human Services, and 

Community Services. These divisions coordinate the provision of leisure and cultural 

opportunities to residents through a variety of programs and facilities, as described below. 

Recreation and Cultural Services 

Recreation and Cultural programs are structured to meet the recreational interests of all 

Inglewood’s residents. Baby/toddler classes, adult and youth classes and sports, youth 

childcare and after-school programs, teen programs, summer youth camps, senior 

programs, and adult and senior excursions are offered through the Parks, Recreation and 

Community Services Department. Cultural and recreational programs in the City are 

conducted at many City facilities, including neighborhood parks, City Hall, the public 

library, community centers, clubhouses, and public schools. 71 Art and Cultural Events 

programs include the Annual South Bay Jazz Festival, Inglewood Celebrates the Arts, 

Inglewood Idol, and other various community-wide special events. 

One of the main focus’s of the Department is to provide services for children of all ages. 

To that end, the City entered into a three year agreement with the Training Research 

Foundation, a private non-profit foundation that administers thirteen Head Start 

Programs throughout Los Angeles County, 72 to continue to operate a Head Start Program 

at Rogers Park. Head Start is a comprehensive child development program which serve 

children from birth to age 5, pregnant women, and their families. They are child-focused 

programs and have the overall goal of increasing the school readiness of young children 

in low-income families 73 . 


2002, page 12. 

71 Inglewood, City of, “Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department 2004 Annual Report,” 

2004 

72 https://laworks.primeworks.org/ Accessed March 30, 2006. 

73 http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/hsb/about/generalinformation/index.htm, Accessed March 30, 

2006. 

4.2-10 



The recent improvements of pre-school facilities with the completion of the Rogers Park 

Pre-School Renovation Project have corresponded with increased enrollment at that 

facility. In fact, enrollment has increased at all pre-school facilities operated by the 

Department, with waiting lists at Siminski and Vincent Parks. 74 In response to the need 

for additional child care services, the Department provides the After School Recreation 

Program for elementary school children within the Inglewood Unified School District. 

This program provides cultural and recreational activities, as well as study groups and 

tutoring services for children with special needs. Additionally, the Department served 

over 45,920 participants of various ages with sports programs in 2004, 75 with activities 

including flag football, tennis, softball, basketball, track and field, boxing, baseball, soccer 

and volleyball. 

Human Services 

The Human Services Division makes a significant contribution to improving the quality 

of life for Inglewood’s residents through provision of services such as a College Resource 

Lab, food distribution programs, after school and summer lunch programs, senior 

services, care management, transportation services, volunteer opportunities and many 

other intergenerational programs and services that appeal to youth, adults and seniors. 

The Human Services Division of the Department of Parks, Recreation and Community 

Services manages Inglewood’s Senior Center. The existing 30+ year-old building is too 

small to serve its senior constituency in need of community services. 76 The Senior Center 

serves 500 to 600 persons a day with recreation, clubs, transportation, classes and social 

services. Food service in the facility is functioning at a maximum at this time, preparing 

and serving 600 meals a day, some of which are transported to seniors off-site. 

Parks Administration 

The Parks Division is responsible for maintaining City parks, parkways, center medians, 

islands, and trees on City property, as well as responding to requests from constituents 

and City Council Members. The Division also implements the Tree Master Plan, which 

sets out principles and strategies for conserving the existing tree population and provides 

a framework for sensitively integrating new plantings within the City. The Maintenance 

Division also provides logistical support for special events held by the Parks, Recreation 

and Community Services Department, as well as other City Departments or Elected 

Officials. 

Community Services 

The Community Services Division is responsible for community beautification and 

fostering neighborhood preservation. These goals are accomplished through responsive 



76 Andrade, Diana P. 2006. Email with Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department, March 13 


4.2-11


and professional blight mitigation and eradication activities in the areas of property 

maintenance, code enforcement and graffiti abatement. 

The Division consists of the following: 

• Code Enforcement—property maintenance issues, (formerly of the Community 

Development Department) 

• Graffiti Abatement– graffiti removal from public and private property (formerly of 

the Public Works Department) 


The Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department is guided by the 1995 Open 

Space Element of the City’s General Plan. This document outlines goals and policies for 

the City parkland and recreational activities, as well as outlining the various sources for 

Department Funding. 

• Issues 

• The City provides a low ratio of parkland to residents. While the northern and 

northeastern parts of Inglewood are adequately served by parks having recreational 

facilities; the southern and southwestern parts are not served by comparable 

facilities. 77 

• Given the limited potential for new parkland acquisition, attention should continue 

to focus on improving access to and increasing the availability of recreational 


• The Senior Center is crowded beyond capacity. A new Senior Center has been 

planned and approved; however, a funding source has not been identified. 

• Land acquired by the City in the southern and southwestern parts of the City with 

aircraft noise mitigation funds should be explored for recreational opportunities. 


Andrade, Diana P. 2006. Email with Parks, Recreation and Community Services 

Department, March 13. 

California State Parks Department. 2006. Kenneth Hahn State Recreation Area. Website: 

http://www.parks.ca.gov/, accessed March 1. 

Forum, The. 2006. Website: http://www.thelaforum.com/index1.html, accessed March 

30. 

Head Start. 2006. Website: 

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/hsb/about/generalinformation/index.htm, 



2002, page 12. 

4.2-12 



Hollywood Park. 2006. Website: http://www.hollywoodpark.com/visit/facilities.html, 


Inglewood, City of, “2005-2006 Annual Budget”. 

Inglewood, City of, “Recovery Action Program for the City of Inglewood’s Park System,” 

December 2002, page 12. 

Inglewood, City of, “Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department 2004 

Annual Report,” 2004 

Inglewood Park Cemetery. 2006. Website: 

http://www.inglewoodparkcemetery.org/heritage.html, accessed March 30, 2006. 

Los Angeles Lakers. 2006. Lakers History. Website: 

http://www.nba.com/lakers/history/lakers_history_new.html#35, accessed March 

30. 

Meshack-Maden, Danita. 2006. Email with Parks, Recreation and Community Services 

Department, March 21. 

Training and Research Foundation, The. 2006. Website: https://laworks.primeworks.org 


4.2-13

4.3 Library Services 

4.3 LIBRARY SERVICES 

This section describes the City of Inglewood’s existing library services. Information for 

this section is based on the City’s website and discussions with staff at the Public 

Library 78 . 


Library Facilities 

The Inglewood Library Department currently manages and operates three libraries; the 

Inglewood Main Library, the Morningside Park Branch Library and the Crenshaw- 

Imperial Branch Library, which is closed until early summer 2006 due to renovations. 

Figure 4.3-1 identifies the locations of the City’s libraries. As of March 2006, the Library 

Department has 30 full-time staff working at its three branches. 

The Inglewood library system includes a number of materials and databases including 

books, magazines, periodicals, business materials, software, sound recordings, computer 

games, reference documents, and community information available for use by patrons. 

Many of these materials are also available in Spanish. Internet access is also available and 

many reference materials are available by electronic access via the Library’s database. 

The Inglewood library system provides more than 150,000 books for youth at the Main 

Library and branches as well as young adult and children's videos and sound recordings at 

the Audio-Visual Division, Main Library. The Library Department defines "youth" as 

young people from infants through the eighth grade. 

As of June 30, 2005, the most recent data available, the Inglewood Library Department 

had 78,204 79 registered borrowers, accounting for 67 percent of the City’s 2005 

population. The annual circulation rate for fiscal year 2004/05 was 291,939 80 ; this number 

includes books, periodicals and audio/video materials that were in checkout usage for the 

department. 

The Inglewood Main Library 

The Main Library, located at 101 W. Manchester Boulevard, has a collection of over 

400,000 volumes, including 1,500 periodical subscriptions. The library is open Monday 

through Saturday and on Sunday afternoons. The Main Library also includes a Special 

Collections inventory that is housed in special rooms for the use of patrons, as well as an 

Audio-Visual Division collection. 

78 Personal with Richard Siminski, Library Director, March 14, 2006. 

79 Ibid. 

80 Ibid. 


4.3-1


The Main Library also has numerous study/conference rooms accommodating one to 

five persons. The Gladys Waddingham Lecture Hall is also available for larger groups up 

to 199 persons. 

The Morningside Park Library and the Crenshaw-Imperial Library Branches 

The Morningside Park Library Branch is located at 3202 West 85th Street. The 

Morningside Park Library’s resources include approximately 19,700 books, magazines, 

and sound recordings, as well as Internet access, educational computer games, word 

processing, spreadsheet software, and an electronic encyclopedia, dictionary, and atlas 

materials. 81 

The Crenshaw-Imperial Branch is located at 11141 Crenshaw Boulevard. It is currently 

closed for renovations to provide several upgrades, including the installation of new air 

conditioning units, lighting, security systems, wireless computer access, and accessibility 

improvements. Work is scheduled to be completed in early summer, 2006. 

• Library Services 

The Inglewood Library System offers a number of services to assist its users. Besides the 

traditional services of materials loaned and research questions answered, computer 

services are quite popular. They include the online library catalog, a number of research 

database subscriptions offered free to cardholders, a web page 

(www.inglewoodlibrary.org), and free public access computing. Internet access is available 

through library computers and through wireless “hot spot” access to those bringing in 

their own laptop computers. Through the Library Department’s web page, a wide variety 

of online services are offered, including catalog searches, and “AskNow”, an online 

interactive reference service, available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Among the key 

services provided by the Library Department are the following 82 : 

• Administrative Services is responsible for the overall operation of the Library 

Department, setting policy, and answering questions about library service and 

operations. Reservations for the Gladys Waddingham Lecture Hall go through 

Administration, as do Passport and Notary services, and most library personnel and 

budget matters. 

• The Adult Services/Reference Division provides reference and information service to all 

of the library's clientele. Librarians in this division select and maintain current 

reference and adult materials, including automated information services, conduct 

tours for the public, provide informational and cultural library programs, and offer 

instruction in the use of library materials, resources, and automated services. 

81 http://www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/library/library_services/branch_library_services.asp, accessed 

March 3, 2006. 

82 http://www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/library/contact_us/directory_of_staff.asp, accessed March 3, 

2006. 

4.3-2 




LIBRARY LOCATIONS 

Legend 

1, Crenshaw-Imperial Library 

2, Inglewood Main Library 

3, Morningside Park Library 


Water Body 

Metro Rail 

Railroad 


Date: May 15, 2006 

Miles 


Figure 4.3-1

4.3 Library Services 

• The Audio-Visual Division offers a selection of popular and subject DVDs and 

videotapes, music audios and audio books on compact disc and audiotape. 

Recordings are in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese. Audio-visual staff maintains a 

circulation desk responsible for checking out and returning most AV items. The 

Division also maintains audio and visual workstations and the Language Learning 

Center with programs and equipment for learning Spanish, German, French, 

Portuguese, and English as a second language. 

• The Branch Library Services provides library services and resources that reflect the 

needs and interests of the branch communities. Free public access computing is 

available on Library computers. 

• The Children's/Youth Services Division offers resources to children and young adults 

from infancy through grade twelve. The division maintains a public service desk 

staffed by professional librarians who offer reference and readers advisory services; 

provides a variety of current materials with access through automated public 

catalogs; conducts school visits; and presents programs for children. Free public 

access computing for children is available in the Children’s room. 

• The Circulation Division maintains two public service desks (checkout/return and 

registration/overdues) at all times the Main Library is open and circulates an 

estimated 420,000 items at the Main Library. The Division notifies borrowers when 

books they have reserved are available. The registration component registers some 

23,000 borrowers and issues approximately 30,000 library cards each year. It also 

generates overdue notices for resources not returned on time and sends selected 

accounts to collections. 

• The Hispanic Services Division provides reference and information service in Spanish 

during operating hours to Spanish-speaking clients. The division is charged with 

developing and maintaining Spanish language materials collections for adults and 

children. Hispanic Services staff conducts tours for the public, provides 

informational and cultural library programs, and offers instruction in the use of 

library materials and resources to Spanish-speaking clients. 

• The Serial Publications Division is responsible for acquiring, processing, and 

maintaining serial and document resources, and for maintaining and updating the 

Library’s subscription databases. Serials resources, whether housed inside the 

library or accessed online, constitute a major part of the Library's reference and 

information service. The Library is the only select depository for federal and state 

government documents in the local area. The division also maintains a public 

service desk and assists the public in the use of the Library’s study rooms, in 

locating materials, and in the use of the public access computers and microform 

equipment. 

• The Stack Maintenance/Security aides keep up book stacks by shelving and shelfreading 

the Main Library book collection of some 370,000 volumes. The division is 

also responsible for security at the Main Library, a service primarily contracted 

through a local security company. 

• The Technical Services Division is responsible for obtaining, cataloging, and readying 

materials for public use. The staff maintains materials collections throughout the 

library system, adding, transferring and withdrawing materials as needed. Technical 

Processing is responsible for cataloging, classifying, and entering materials in the 


4.3-5


Library’s materials database where they can be viewed through the online catalog 

and checked out through the circulation system. In addition, the Division continues 

the development of automated Library systems, working with the city's 

Information Technology and Communications Department and outside vendors as 

necessary. 

• Issues 

• Overall library usage has been declining for the past two years. 


Personal communication with Richard Siminski, Library Director, March 14, 2006. 

http://www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/library/library_services/branch_library_services. 

asp, accessed March 3, 2006. 

http://www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/library/contact_us/directory_of_staff.asp, 


4.3-6 


CHAPTER 5 

Environmental Resources 

This chapter describes the City of Inglewood’s existing environmental resources. This 

chapter includes the following sections: 

• Biological Resources 

• Hydrology and Water Quality 

• Topography and Hillsides 

• Visual Resources 

• Historical-Cultural Resources 

• Air Quality 

5.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

This section provides information regarding existing biological resources within the City 

of Inglewood and is based on a review of literature pertaining to the habitats, plants, and 

animals of the City and the region. Data sources include the California Natural Diversity 

Database (Natural Diversity Database), which is maintained by the California Department 

of Fish and Game (CDFG). The Natural Diversity Database identifies sensitive habitats 

and species that may be encountered within a specific United States Geologic Survey 

(USGS) quadrangle, and the particular area in the quadrangle where the habitat or species 

was identified. 


The City of Inglewood is fully developed with urban uses and has little undisturbed native 

vegetation. As a result, the diversity of terrestrial animal species is very low. While no 

formal biological studies have been conducted to document species of wildlife found in 

the City, the animal species in the City are likely to be dominated by common native and 

non-native animal species that thrive in an urban environment. 

Due to the urbanized nature of the City, the abundance and diversity of reptile and 

amphibian species in the City is also very low. This group of animals is particularly 

susceptible to exposure and lack of habitat. 

Some migratory bird species pass through the City. Due to their mobility and range of 

travel, avian species tend to be more abundant and conspicuous than other animals. 

There is a component of migratory birds passing through the City while moving from 

wintering grounds in the south to breeding grounds in the north. The number of resident 

bird species in the City is low due to the lack of undisturbed habitat. 

The level of development in the City is conducive to an environment for non-native 

terrestrial mammal species and provides little opportunity for resident native species. 

Non-native mammals that may potentially occur in the City include the house mouse 

(Mus musculus), Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), black rat (Rattus rattus), and domestic cats 

and dogs. Some native terrestrial mammal species may occur within the City, especially in 


5.1-1

Chapter 5 Environmental Resources 

those areas closest to the foothills of the Santa Monica Mountains and among those 

mammals adaptable to human presence. These species include the California ground 

squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), coyote (Canis latrans), and raccoon (Procyon lotor). Generally, 

however, the numbers and kinds of mammals found within the City limits are low. 

Plant Life 

Review of GIS databases and aerial photographs indicate that there is little native 

terrestrial vegetation within the City of Inglewood. The only relatively undisturbed areas 

include those located near the foothills of the Santa Monica Mountains and the few open 

space areas located in the City, and portions near the Centinela creek, and Dominguez 

creek. No other area exists within the City limit that is able to support native plant 

communities. The remaining open space within the City is located in public parks, which 

typically do not contain natural or native vegetation. The principal terrestrial vegetation in 

this highly urbanized setting consists of landscape vegetation and other cultivated species 

with some invasive, weedy, non-native plants in areas that are not maintained. No unique 

plants can be found at destinations within any of the City parks. However, descriptions 

have been provided in Appendix B to illustrate the few types of plant life that exists in 

some of the natural areas of the City as well as the surrounding areas. 

Wildlife Movement 

Wildlife corridors vary greatly in their overall significance. General information that 

currently exists on corridors suggests that major drainages, canyon bottoms, and 

ridgetops, as well as areas that provide important resources for wildlife, will be the most 

significant for wildlife movement. In general, two types of corridors exist. Regional 

corridors are generally those that allow movement between large, often widely separated 

areas. These may connect National Forests, mountain ranges, or other major wildlife use 

areas. Local wildlife corridors are those that allow dispersion between smaller, generally 

more adjacent areas, such as between canyons or ridges, or important resource areas. 

Due the highly-urbanized nature of the City, the potential for overland wildlife movement 

through the majority of the City would be highly restricted. Some local movement of 

wildlife would be expected to occur throughout the City. 

Biological Resources within Inglewood Watersheds 

The City of Inglewood is located within the upper boundaries of both the Ballona Creek 

Watershed and the Dominguez Watersheds. Biological resources within Inglewood have 

only been reported in the Dominquez Watershed. 

Dominguez Watershed 

Existing conditions of habitats and biological resources within the Dominguez Watershed 

are summarized based on review of available reports, search of the California Natural 

Diversity Database (CNDDB), and reconnaissance-level surveys. There are several types 

of habitats within the Dominguez Watershed. The largest habitat is urban, developed 

5.1-2 


5.1 Biological Resources 

land. Vacant land includes several types of habitats ranging from open water to 

woodlands. The exact acreage associated with each of the habitat types within the 

watershed is unavailable since many of the open space areas have not been 

comprehensively surveyed. 

There are five sites within and immediately adjacent to the Dominguez Watershed that 

are designated as Significant Ecological Areas (SEA) by the Los Angeles Regional Water 

Quality Control Board (Feb, 2000) based on data from the California Department of Fish 

and Game, State Water Resources Control Board, and Los Angeles County Department 

of Regional Planning. These include Madrona Marsh (SEA 36), Harbor Lake Regional 

Park (SEA 35), Rolling Hills Canyons (SEA 31), Terminal Island (SEA 33), and Palos 

Verdes Peninsula Coastline (SEA 34). The City of Rolling Hills Estates designated two 

areas within the watershed boundaries as Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs): 

Rolling Hills Canyons (also a Los Angeles County SEA) and Linden H. Chandler 

Preserve. 

Special-Status Biological Resources 

The following section addresses special-status biological resources observed, reported, or 

having the potential to occur within the City of Inglewood. These resources include plant 

and wildlife species that have been afforded special status and/or recognition by federal 

and state resource agencies, as well as private conservation organizations and special 

interest groups such as the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) (List 1A, 1B, and 2). 

In general, the principal reason an individual taxon (species, subspecies, or variety) is 

given such recognition is the documented or expected decline or limitation of its 

population size or geographical extent and/or distribution that results in most cases, from 

habitat loss. 

Although review of the Natural Diversity Database reveals several records of sensitive 

species, most of these are believed to be extirpated or no longer existing within the area 

due to the level of development in the City. Field studies would be required to verify the 

presence or absence of these sensitive species within the City limits. 

Table 5.1-1 in Appendix B lists sensitive plants, animal and habitat types potentially 

occurring in and near the City of Inglewood. Special status habitats are vegetation types, 

associations, or sub-associations that support concentrations of special status plant or 

wildlife species, are of relatively limited distribution, or are of particular value to wildlife. 

Special Status Species Descriptions 

The South Coast marsh vole, Coastal dunes milk-vetch, Southern tarplant, Coulter’s 

goldfield, and Spreading navarretia (federally/state listed threatened or endangered 

species) were identified as (moderately) potentially occurring on-site or reported within an 

approximately ten-mile radius of the City of Inglewood [see Figure 5.1-1]. Each of the 

state and/or federally listed species in Appendix B are described in greater detail. 


5.1-3



Federal 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) 

The ESA and implementing regulations, Title 16 United States Code (USC) §1531 et seq. 

(16 USC 1531 et seq.), Title 50 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §17.1 et seq. (50 CFR 

§17.1 et seq.), includes provisions for the protection and management of federally listed 

threatened or endangered plants and animals and their designated critical habitats. 

Section 7 of the ESA requires a permit to take threatened or endangered species during 

lawful project activities. The administering agency for the above authority is the USFWS 

for terrestrial, avian, and most aquatic species. The National Marine Fisheries Service is 

responsible for administering the federal ESA as it applies to marine species and 

anadromous fish. 

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act 

Section 7 of Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16 USC 742 et seq., 16 USC 1531 et seq., and 

50 CFR 17 requires consultation if any project facilities could jeopardize the continued 

existence of an endangered species. Applicability depends on federal jurisdiction over 

some aspect of the project. The administering agency for these authorities is expected to 

be the Corps in coordination with the USFWS. 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) 

The MBTA (16 USC §§703–711) includes provisions for protection of migratory birds, 

including the non-permitted take of migratory birds, under the authority of the USFWS 

and CDFG. The MBTA protects over 800 species including geese, ducks, shorebirds, 

raptors, songbirds, and many relatively common species. 

Clean Water Act of 1977, Section 404 

This section of the Act (33 USC 1251 et seq., 33 CFR §§320 and 323 gives the Corps 

authority to regulate discharges of dredge or fill material into waters of the U.S., including 

wetlands. 

Clean Water Act of 1977, Section 401 

This section of the Act requires a state-issued Water Quality Certification for all projects 

regulated under Section 404. In California, the RWQCB issues Water Quality 

Certifications with jurisdiction over the project area. The RWQCB, Los Angeles Region, 

issues Section 401 Water Quality Certifications for Los Angeles County. 

5.1-4 




BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

Legend 

1, Coulter's goldfields 

2, South coast marsh vole 

3, Coastal California gnatcatcher 

4, Coastal dunes milk-vetch 

5, Southern tarplant 

6, Spreading navarretia 

Source: CA. Department of Fish & Game, January 2006. 


Miles 


Figure 5.1-1

5.1 Biological Resources 

California Endangered Species Act of 1984 (CESA) 

The CESA and implementing regulations in the Fish and Game Code, §2050 through 

§2089, includes provisions for the protection and management of plant and animals 

species listed as endangered or threatened, or designated as candidates for such listing. 

Incidental take of an endangered species is permitted by CDFG only under certain 

conditions and provided that the proper federal permits have been obtained and 

notifications made to the CDFG as described in Fish and Game Code §2080.1. Plants of 

California declared to be endangered, threatened, or rare are listed at 14 CCR §670.2. 

Animals of California declared to be endangered or threatened are listed at 14 CCR 

§670.5.14. CCR §15000 et seq. describes the types and extent of information required to 

evaluate the effects of a proposed project on biological resources of a project site. 

Fish and Game Code of California 

The Fish and Game Code provides specific protection and listing for several types of 

biological resources. 

Section 1580 of the Fish and Game Code presents the process and definition for 

Designated Ecological Reserves. Designated Ecological Reserves are significant wildlife 

habitats to be preserved in natural condition for the general public to observe and study. 

Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code requires a Streambed Alteration Agreement for 

any activity that may alter the bed and/or bank of a stream, river, or channel. Typical 

activities that require a Streambed Alteration Agreement include excavation or fill placed 

within a channel, vegetation clearing, structures for diversion of water, installation of 

culverts and bridge supports, cofferdams for construction dewatering, and bank 

reinforcement. 

Section 2081(b) and (c) of the CESA allows CDFG to issue an incidental take permit for 

a state-listed threatened and endangered species only if specific criteria are met. These 

criteria can be found in Title 14 CCR, Sections 783.4(a) and (b). No Section 2081(b) 

permit may authorize the take of “fully protected” species and “specified birds.” If a 

project is planned in area where a species or specified bird occurs, an applicant must 

design the project to avoid all take; the CDFG cannot provide take authorization under 

CESA. 

Native Plant Protection Act of 1977 

The Native Plant Protection Act of 1977 and implementing regulations in Section 1900 et seq. 

of the Fish and Game Code designates rare and endangered plants, and provides specific 

protection measures for identified populations. It is administered by the CDFG. 


5.1-7


Wetlands Conservation Policy of 1993 

This policy provides for the protection, preservation, restoration, enhancement, and 

expansion of wetland habitats in California. Primarily it acts to ensure no overall net loss 

of wetlands within the state and achieve a long-term net gain in the quantity, quality, and 

permanence of wetlands acreage and values in California in a manner that fosters 

creativity, stewardship, and respect for private property. The administering agencies for 

this authority are the CDFG, the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal- 

EPA), and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)—South Coast Region. 

Local 


Under Section 2-164.1 of the City of Inglewood Municipal Code, the Recreation, Parks 

and Community Service Director will have full jurisdiction and control of the designation 

of the kind and type, planting, setting out, location and placement of all trees and shrubs 

in the public streets and parkways of the City. Under Article 3, Section 5-58 (Park 

Regulations), parkway plants require provisions that relate to the planting and maintaining 

of trees and shrubs in the public streets and parkways of the City. 

• Issues 

• While there is currently no federal or state listed species in the City, if one were to 

be identified at a later date, it could impact redevelopment activities within the City. 


Abrams, L. 1923. Illustrated Flora of the Pacific States. Volumes I, II, and III. Stanford 

University Press: Stanford, CA. 

———. 1960. Illustrated Flora of the Pacific States. Volume IV. Stanford University 

Press: Stanford, CA. 

California, State of. 1998. Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. 

———. 2004. California Environmental Quality Act, Statutes and Guidelines. Governor’s 

Office of Planning and Research: Sacramento. 

———. 2002. Fish and Game Code of California. 

5.1-8 


5.2 Hydrology and Water Quality 

5.2 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 

This section describes the existing surface water and groundwater resources within the 

City, as well as the quality of these resources. Federal, state, and local regulations 

pertaining to hydrology and water quality are also provided. Information on water 

infrastructure and supply and potential flooding hazards can be found in Chapter 3 

(Infrastructure) Section 3.1 and Chapter 6 (Community Safety and Hazards) Section 6.3, 

respectively. Information for this section was obtained from documents provided by the 

City, California Department of Water Resources, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality 

Control Board (LARWQCB), and the various City documents. 


Watershed 

Regional Drainage 

The City of Inglewood is located within the boundaries of three watersheds: Los Angeles, 

Ballona, and Dominguez. As illustrated in Figure 5.2-1, the Dominguez Watershed makes 

up the greatest portion of the City and covers approximately 3,900 acres or approximately 

67 percent. The Ballona Watershed makes up 1,936 acres (33 percent) and the 

Dominguez Watershed covers only one acre (0.02 percent) of the City. 

Local Drainage 

The City of Inglewood drainage system drains into the various tributaries of each 

watershed discussed above. Typically, these areas are predominately channelized and 

highly developed with both commercial and residential properties. Most of the drainage 

networks are controlled by structural flood control measures, including debris basins, 

storm drains, underground culverts, and open concrete channels. 

Surface Water 

The City of Inglewood is a highly developed community with few natural areas. The 

drainage tributaries and storage reservoirs in the City are associated with the City’s water 

system infrastructure. Information on this can be found in Chapter 3. 

Groundwater 

Groundwater is concentrated in areas called basins, which are the natural hydro geological 

unit for delineating groundwater. An aquifer is a subsurface saturated geological 

formation that contains and transmits significant quantities of water. Multiple subbasins 

and aquifers may be located within each basin. The City is located on the West Coast 

Groundwater Basin, which underlies the southwest portion of the Los Angeles Coastal 

Plain. 


5.2-1


The City operates four wells immediately south of the City that draw from the local 

aquifer to supplement the City’s supply of imported water from the Metropolitan Water 

District (MWD). Currently the City of Inglewood receives approximately 56 percent of its 

water supply from local groundwater wells. As groundwater continues to be a valuable 

resource, the City must avoid the risk of overdrafting the aquifers. The risk of overdraft 

can be avoided through groundwater recharge activities such as recharge basins and 

injection wells. To replenish the West Coast Groundwater Basin (and to prevent further 

seawater intrusion), the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) created 

injection barriers along the West Coast and the Dominguez Gap. The Water 

Replenishment District (WRD), which is responsible for managing the basin, has allowed 

recycled and imported water to be injected into “seawater intrusion barriers” owned and 

operated by the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works in the West Coast 

Basin. The amount of runoff can be minimized and infiltration increased by using 

permeable pavement for areas such as sidewalks and parking lots in future development. 

Subbasins 

West Coast Subbasin 

The Central Subbasin occupies part of the southern portion of the Coastal Plain of Los 

Angeles Groundwater Basin. This subbasin is commonly referred to as the “West Coast 

Basin.” The Bellflower aquiclude also falls within the West Coast Basin along with the 

Gardena, Gage, Gaspur, Silverado, Lynwood, Sunnyside, and Semiperched aquifers. 

Historically, groundwater flow in this basin has been southward and westward from the 

Central Coastal Plain toward the Pacific Ocean. Water levels have risen about thirty feet 

from levels measured in 1961. Recharge of the West Coast Basin is largely limited to 

underflow from the Central Basin through and over the Newport-Inglewood fault zone. 

Seawater intrusion occurs in some aquifers that are exposed to the ocean offshore. Minor 

replenishment to the West Coast Basin occurs from infiltration of surface inflow from 

both the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers into the uppermost aquifers. The total 

storage of the primary water producing aquifer, the Silverado aquifer, is estimated to be 

approximately 6,500,000 af. Data for the entire basin is not available. 

Water Quality 

Water Quality Constituents of Concern 

Total Dissolved Solids 

Increases in groundwater total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations are a function of the 

recharge of saline water originating from storm flows, urban runoff, imported water, and 

incidental recharge. Increased TDS concentrations begin to interfere with water usage 

between 500 and 1,000 mg/L. Above 1,000 mg/L TDS water is generally considered 

brackish and requires treatment for domestic purposes. 

5.2-2 




WATERSHEDS 

B allona 

Waters hed 

S anta Moni ca 

Upper 

S anta Monica B ay 

Waters hed 

Cul ver Ci ty 

L OS 

ANGE L E S 

COU NT Y 

L ader a H ei ghts 

Vi ew P ar k - 

Wi nds or H i l l s 

Mar i na 

del 

R ey 

L OS 

ANGE L E S 

COU NT Y 


L os Angeles 

Waters hed 

L OS 

ANGE L E S 

COU NT Y 

L ower 

S anta Monica B ay 

Waters hed 

L ennox 

Wes tmont 

E l S egundo 

Del Ai r e 

Wes t Athens 

Wi l l owbr ook 

H awthor ne 

Manhattan B each 

L awndal e 

Dominguez 

Waters hed 

Al ondr a 

P ar k 

Gar dena 

Wes t 

Compton 

L OS 

ANGE L E S 

COU NT Y 

Legend 

Watershed Boundary 

H er mos a 

B each 

R edondo B each 

Car s on 





Miles 

0 0.250.5 1 1.5 

Figure 5.2-1


Nitrates 

Most nitrates are associated with agricultural activities and are among California’s leading 

contaminants. The federal water quality standard for nitrate is 10 mg/L. At this level the 

water is not safe for consumption. 

Hydrogen Sulfide 

Hydrogen sulfide gas is formed from decomposing underground deposits of organic 

matter. Hydrogen sulfide gas is a nuisance that is not usually considered a health risk at 

the concentrations normally found in household water. Water containing hydrogen 

sulfide, commonly called sulfur water, has a distinctive "rotten egg" odor, which may be 

especially noticeable when running hot water. Hydrogen sulfide dissolved in water can 

also corrode plumbing metals, such as iron, steel, copper, and brass and exposed metal 

parts in washing machines and other water-using appliances. Typical treatment methods 

include carbon filtration, aeration, and chlorination. The EPA has established a 

"secondary" standard related to odor for hydrogen sulfide of 250 mg/L. 

Iron and Manganese 

Iron and manganese occur naturally in geologic formations. They dissolve into 

groundwater as acidic rainfall percolates through the soil and rock. In higher 

concentrations, iron and manganese can cause the following problems: 

• Staining: iron and manganese stain laundry and household water fixtures 

• Taste: iron and manganese cause a metallic taste in water 

• Appearance: they will often give an oily appearance, or “crusty” sheen to the 

water’s surface 

• Clogging: iron and manganese support the growth of bacteria that is not considered 

a health risk, but can clog strainers, pumps, and valves 

Iron in water is not a health hazard by itself but it may increase the hazard of pathogenic 

organisms, since many of these organisms require iron to grow. Manganese in large doses 

causes headaches, apathy, irritability, insomnia, and weakness of the legs. Long-term 

heavy exposure may result in a nervous-system disorder. 

The EPA has established “secondary” standards for iron and manganese in drinking 

water. These limits are based on aesthetic concerns, such as staining, taste and odor, etc., 

and are as follows: 

• Iron = 0.30 mg/L 

• Manganese = 0.05 mg/L 

EPA has not set health standards for either iron or manganese in drinking water. 

Volatile Organic Compounds 

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are considered human-made contaminants. The 

primary source of VOCs in the environment is from industrial activities. When VOCs are 


5.2-5


spilled or dumped, a portion evaporates, but some soaks into the ground. Once in the 

soil, VOCs can be transported to the water table via percolation. This group includes a 

wide range of individual contaminates; as a result the water quality standards reflect this 

wide range. 

Surface Water Quality 

In general, changes in land use will result in changes in water quality. There is a strong 

correlation between decreasing water quality and increasing development. As more land is 

developed and more impervious surfaces are created, groundwater recharge is affected as 

well as the volume, rate, and quality of surface water runoff. Urban runoff flows into 

storm drains and in most cases flows directly to creeks, rivers, lakes, and the ocean. 

Polluted runoff can have harmful effects on drinking water, recreational water, and 

wildlife. The EPA National Water Quality Inventory has identified runoff from development 

as one of the leading sources of water quality impairment. Urban runoff was ranked as 

the sixth leading source of impairment in rivers, fourth leading source of impairment in 

lakes, and the second in estuaries. 

As directed by the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), the State Water Resources Control 

Board (SWRCB) adopts a list of impaired water bodies (the 303(d) list) for the state of 

California. The list was most recently updated in 2002 (adopted in 2003) and identifies 

water quality impairments including trash, metals, pathogens, and organic pesticides. 

Specifically, high levels of dissolved solids, chlorides, sulfates and heavy metals have been 

recorded in the Watershed. During wet weather, measurements of copper, lead, and zinc 

have regularly exceeded values set in the California Toxic Rule. These elevated 

contaminate levels restrict the beneficial uses of the watershed. 

Groundwater Quality 

West Coast Subbasin 

The TDS concentration, measured from 45 wells across the West Coast Basin, ranges 

from 170 to 5,510 mg/L, with an average concentration of 720 mg/L. Additionally, 

approximately 45 wells were analyzed for inorganic and radiological contaminants, 

nitrates, pesticides, and VOCs. The concentration of inorganic contaminants in 30 wells 

exceeded the maximum contaminant level. The MCL for VOCs was not exceeded at any 

of the wells in this subbasin. Radiological contaminants were above the maximum 

contaminant level in one well and nitrate concentrations were not above the MCL in any 

wells. 

5.2-6 




Federal 

Safe Drinking Water Act 

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and subsequent amendments authorize the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set health-based standards or maximum 

contaminant levels (MCL) for drinking water to protect public health against both 

naturally-occurring and man-made contaminants. EPA administers the SDWA at the 

federal level and establishes MCLs for bacteriological, inorganic, organic and radiological 

contaminants (United States Code Title 42, and Code of Federal Regulations Title 40). 

California EPA administers and enforces the drinking water program and has adopted its 

own SDWA, which incorporates the federal SDWA requirements including some 

requirements specific only to California (California Health and Safety Code, 

Section 116350 and related sections). 

The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is 

initiating evaluation for several chemicals for which new MCLs have been promulgated 

by the EPA, which triggers a requirement that OEHHA prepare a Public Health Goal 

(PHG) designed to define the level of pollutant at which no adverse health effect is 

expected to occur. PHG levels are concentrations of chemicals in drinking water that are 

not anticipated to produce adverse health effects following long-term exposures. These 

goals are advisory but must be used as the health basis to update the state’s primary 

drinking water standards (MCLs) by the California Department of Health Services (DHS) 

(Health and Safety Code Section 116365(b)(1). In addition, re-review, as required by 

Health and Safety Code Section 116365(e)(1), is being initiated for chemicals for which 

initial PHGs were published in 1997 and 1999. Risk assessments are being initiated for 

the chemicals listed below that are newly regulated: 

• Bromate 

• Chlorite 

• Haloacetic acid 

• Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) 

A list of all public health goals can be found at: http://www.oehha.ca.gov/water/ohg/ 

allphgs.html. 

Federal Clean Water Act 

The federal CWA is designed to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and 

biological integrity of the nation’s waters. The CWA also directs states to establish water 

quality standards for all “waters of the United States” and to review and update such 

standards on a triennial basis. Other provisions of the CWA related to basin planning 

include Section 208, which authorizes the preparation of waste treatment management 

plans, and Section 319, which mandates specific actions for the control of pollution from 

nonpoint sources. The EPA has delegated responsibility for implementation of portions 


5.2-7


of the CWA to the SWRCB and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), 

including water quality control planning and control programs, such as the National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program. 

Section 303 of the CWA requires states to adopt water quality standards for all surface 

waters of the United States. Section 304(a) requires the EPA to publish water quality 

criteria that accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge on the kind and extent of all 

effects on health and welfare that may be expected from the presence of pollutants in 

water. Where multiple uses exist, water quality standards must protect the most sensitive 

use. Water quality standards are typically numeric, although narrative criteria based upon 

biomonitoring methods may be employed where numerical standards cannot be 

established or where they are needed to supplement numerical standards. 

Section 303(c)(2)(b) of the CWA requires states to adopt numerical water quality 

standards for toxic pollutants for which EPA has published water quality criteria and 

which reasonably could be expected to interfere with designated uses in a water body. 

All projects resulting in discharges, whether to land or water, are subject to Section 13263 

of the California Water Code and are required to obtain approval of Waste Discharge 

Requirements (WDRs) by the RWQCBs. Land and groundwater-related WDRs (i.e., non- 

NPDES WDRs) regulate discharges of privately or publicly treated domestic wastewater 

and process and wash-down wastewater. WDRs for discharges to surface waters also 

serve as NPDES permits, which are further described below. 

Responsibility for the protection of basin water quality in California rests with the 

SWRCB and nine RWQCBs. The SWRCB establishes statewide policies and regulations 

for the implementation of water quality control programs mandated by federal and state 

water quality statutes and regulations. The RWQCBs develop and implement Water 

Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans) that consider regional beneficial uses, water quality 

characteristics, and water quality problems. The Los Angeles Basin Plan implements a 

number of federal and state laws, the most important of which are the state Porter-Cologne 

Water Quality Control Act and the federal CWA. 

NPDES Permits 

The NPDES permit system was established in the CWA to regulate both point source 

discharges (municipal or industrial discharge at a specific location or pipe) and nonpoint 

source discharges (diffuse runoff of water from adjacent land uses) to surface waters of 

the United States. For point source discharges, each NPDES permit contains limits on 

allowable concentrations and mass emissions of pollutants contained in the discharge. 

For nonpoint source discharges, the NPDES program establishes a comprehensive 

stormwater quality program to manage urban stormwater and minimize pollution of the 

environment to the maximum extent practicable (MEP). The NPDES program consists 

of (1) characterizing receiving water quality, (2) identifying harmful constituents, 

(3) targeting potential sources of pollutants, and (4) implementing a Comprehensive 

Stormwater Management Program. 

5.2-8 



The reduction of pollutants in urban stormwater discharge to the MEP through the use 

of structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) is one of the primary 

objectives of the water quality regulations. BMPs typically used to manage runoff water 

quality include controlling roadway and parking lot contaminants by installing oil and 

grease separators at storm drain inlets, cleaning parking lots on a regular basis, 

incorporating peak-flow reduction and infiltration features, such as grass swales, 

infiltration trenches, and grass filter strips into landscaping, and implementing educational 

programs. 

NPDES Phase I (General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit) 

Phase I of the NPDES Program addresses stormwater runoff from “medium” and 

“large” municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) generally serving populations of 

100,000 or greater, construction activities disturbing five acres of land or greater, and ten 

categories of industrial activities. With respect to the disturbance of five acres of land or 

greater from construction activities, the SWRCB issued one statewide General 

Construction Activity Stormwater Permit (on August 20, 1992) to apply to all 

construction activities. Landowners are responsible for obtaining and complying with the 

permit but may delegate specific duties to developers and contractors by mutual consent. 

For construction activities, the permit requires landowners, or their designated agent, to: 

• Eliminate or reduce nonstormwater discharges to stormwater systems and other 

waters of the United States 

• Develop and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan 

• Perform inspections of stormwater control structures and pollution prevention 

measures 

A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), prepared in compliance with the 

Permit, describes the site, erosion and sediment controls, runoff water quality monitoring, 

means of waste disposal, implementation of approved local plans, control of postconstruction 

sediment and erosion control measures and maintenance responsibilities, 

and nonstormwater management controls. Dischargers are also required to inspect 

construction sites before and after storms to identify stormwater discharge from 

construction activity and to identify and implement controls where necessary. 

NPDES Phase II 

New NPDES Phase II stormwater regulations were finalized and issued by the EPA in 

January 2000 in an effort to continue to preserve, protect, and improve the nation’s water 

resources from polluted stormwater runoff. These new regulations are designed to 

implement programs to control urban stormwater runoff from additional MS4s in 

urbanized areas and the operations of small construction sites that were not already 

covered by Phase I NPDES permits. The main objectives of the Phase II regulations are 

to reduce the amount of pollutants being discharged to the maximum extent practicable 

and protect the quality of the receiving waters. 


5.2-9


To meet this goal, the permittee must implement a Stormwater Management Program 

that addresses six minimum control measures, including (1) public education and 

outreach; (2) public participation/involvement; (3) illicit discharge detection and 

elimination; (4) construction site stormwater runoff control for sites greater than one 

acre; (5) post-construction stormwater management in new development and 

redevelopment; and (6) pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal 

operations. These control measures will typically be addressed by developing BMPs. 

The LARWQCB completed a revision of the NPDES permit for the Los Angeles region 

in 1996 and 2001. The revised permit is more comprehensive and specific than the 

previous permit and requires the City to conduct additional employee education and 

institute a construction site inspection program to help mitigate construction-related 

stormwater impacts. 

Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act 

The state of California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act authorizes the SWRCB to 

adopt, review, and revise policies for all waters of the state (including both surface and 

groundwaters) and directs the RWQCB to develop regional Basin Plans. Section 13170 of 

the California Water Code also authorizes the SWRCB to adopt water quality control 

plans on its own initiative. 

The Los Angeles Basin Plan specifically (1) designates beneficial uses for surface and 

ground waters, (2) sets narrative and numerical objectives that must be attained or 

maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and conform to the state’s antidegradation 

policy, and (3) describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the 

region. In cases where the Basin Plan does not contain a standard for a particular 

pollutant, other criteria are used to establish a standard. Other criteria may be applied 

from SWRCB documents (e.g., the Inland Surface Waters Plan and the Pollutant Policy 

Document) or from water quality criteria developed under Section 304(a) of the CWA. 

Reclaimed Water Regulations 

Within the state of California, reclaimed water is regulated by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), the SWRCB, RWQCBs, and the state Department of Health 

Services. The SWRCB has adopted Resolution No. 77-1, Policy with Respect to Water 

Reclamation in California. This policy states that the SWRCB and RWQCBs will 

encourage and consider or recommend for funding water reclamation projects that do 

not impair water rights or beneficial in-stream uses. 

The RWQCBs implement the SWRCB’s Guidelines for Regulation of Water Reclamation 

and issue waste discharge permits that serve to regulate the quality of reclaimed water 

based on stringent water quality requirements. The state Department of Health Services 

develops policies protecting human health and comments and advises on RWQCB 

permits (RCIP Existing Setting Report and Resolution No. 77-1, Policy with Respect to 

Water Reclamation in California). 

5.2-10 



Metropolitan Water District Groundwater Recovery Program 

MWD established the Groundwater Recovery Program (GRP), which provides financial 

assistance to member agencies to improve and enhance the quality of local ground water 

that does not meet the regulatory standards of the EPA and DHS. 

Local 

The City of Inglewood supports water conservation planning and implementation of 

water conservation measures. Historically, the City has employed numerous conservation 

measures to discourage water waste and overuse. In addition, the City participates in the 

promotion of water conservation programs developed and implemented by MWD. The 

following list outlines the various programs the City implements: 

• Water Survey Programs for Single-Family and Multi-Family Residential 

Customers. This program includes literature for the public that provides tips on 

identifying systems leaks and instruction for repair. Under the program, the City 

also monitors water usage by water use category. This helps identify changes in 

water demand patterns. 

• Residential Plumbing Retrofit. The City participates in several programs to 

encourage the retrofit of residential plumbing. These include installation of lowflow 

showerheads and toilet dams to conserve water. It also includes participation 

in ultra low-flow toilet replacement and rebate programs. 

• System Water Audits, Leak Detection, and Repair. As part of normal 

operation and maintenance of the water system, water division staff does 

preventive maintenance of approximately 152 miles of water pipelines. This 

includes regular valve, meter, detector check, and pipeline maintenance. If during 

routine inspection of the system leaks are encountered or suspected, further 

evaluation is conducted, and if leaks are found, they are repaired. 

• Metering with Commodity Rates for All New Connections and Retrofit of 

Existing Connections. The City meters all customers, including separate metering 

for residential, commercial, industrial, municipal facilities, and fire flows. The City 

has an inclining block rate for water service based on the quality of water 

consumed. Based on the current billing system, the more water a customer 

consumes, the higher the water bill because the commodity rates are per unit of 

water consumed, thereby providing a cost benefit to conserving water. 

• Large Landscape Conservation Programs and Incentives. As part of this 

program, the City provides reclaimed water at a lower rate than potable water to 

provide an incentive to use reclaimed water. 

• High-Efficiency Washing Machine Rebate Program. In cooperation with 

MWD and other agency sponsors, the City participates in a high-efficiency washing 

machine rebate program. 

• Public Information Programs. The City has developed a public information 

program to educate the public to the benefits of water conservation. The program 


5.2-11


involves the dissemination of information through literature provided at City Hall 

and other City facilities, articles in the City newsletter and local cable television. 

• School Education. The City participates in a variety of school education programs 

in cooperation with MWD. 

• Conservation Programs for Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional 

Accounts. These programs include specific provisions for commercial, industrial, 

and institutional customers. 

The City has several other programs to generally promote water conservation. These 

include water waste prohibition, residential ultra-low flush toilet replacement program, 

and conservation pricing. 

• Issues 

• Increasing urbanization will increase impervious surfaces, increasing stormwater 

runoff and sedimentation, thereby triggering potential decreases in water quality. 


Inglewood, City of. 1997. Inglewood General Plan, Conservation Element. 

———. 2003. 25-Year Water Master Plan. September. 

———. 2005. Urban Water Management Plan. December. 

California Department of Water Resources. 2003. California’s Groundwater – Bulletin 

118, Update 2003. 

Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB). 2006. Watershed 

Management. Website: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb4/html/programs/ 

regional_program/ws_santamonica.html, April. 

Rhode Island Department of Health. 2003. Healthy Drinking Waters for Rhode 

Islanders. http://www.uri.edu/ce/wq/has/html/Hydrogen.pdf 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. n.d. National Water Quality Inventory. 

www.epa.gov. 

Whatcom County Washington Health Department. 2003. Drinking Water Program, 

Environmental Health Division. 

www.co.whatcom.wa.us/health/environmental/drinking_water/iron.jsp 

5.2-12 


5.3 Topography and Hillsides 

5.3 TOPOGRAPHY AND HILLSIDES 

This section describes the existing topography, slope, and elevation of the City. 

Information for this section was obtained from the 1995 Safety Element of the General 

Plan. 


The City of Inglewood is comprised of three main topographical terrains: the Baldwin 

Hills located north of Centinela Creek, the southern Morningside Park area known as the 

Rosecrans Hills, and the Inglewood-Torrance coastal plain. 

The Baldwin Hills represent the highest and steepest terrain conditions within the City. 

Slopes within the hills are generally no steeper than 20 percent. Figure 5.3-1 identifies the 

topography and slope characteristics of the City. The sides of the steeper drainages rarely 

exceed a slope of 33 percent. The Rosecrans Hills, along with the Baldwin Hills, are part 

of the Newport-Inglewood uplift, a belt of discontinuous low hills that extend from the 

Santa Monica mountains southeastward across the Los Angeles Basin to Newport Beach. 

The Inglewood-Torrance plain is nearly flat with a gentle slope to the southwest of 50 to 

75 feet per mile. This plain merges with the El Segundo sand hills along the coast west of 

the City. 

As shown in Table 5.3-1, approximately 93 percent of the City (approximately 

5,396.3 acres) has a slope gradient between approximately zero and five degrees. This 

area, located throughout the majority of the City, is considered to be easily developed. 

Table 5.3-1 

SOURCE: 

Percent of City Land within Specified Slope Gradients 

Slope Acres Percent 

0–5 5,396.3 92.6 

6–10 386.7 6.6 

11–15 38.0 0.65 

16–20 3.6 0.06 

Total 5,824.7 100.0 

City of Inglewood, 2006. GIS data. April 

Slope gradient in the City increases along the Rosecrans Hills, which run northwest to 

southeast in the eastern portion of the City. In the northern portion of the City, slope 

gradient increases in the Baldwin Hills area by as much as 15-20 percent. All of the 

approximately 3.6 percent of the City with a gradient of greater than 16 percent is within 

the Rosecrans and Baldwin Hills areas. 

Because a relatively small portion of the City has a gradient greater than 16 percent 

(approximately 3.6), the City does not currently have regulations designed to protect 

properties from slope failure and other potential hazards. 


5.3-1


• Regulatory Context 

There are no applicable Federal, State or local regulations related to topography. 

• Issues 

• The City does not currently have regulations or policies to mitigate potential 

hazards, including landslides that could result from development in areas of the 

City with increasing gradients (i.e. Baldwin Hills area). 


Inglewood General Plan, 1995. Safety Element, July. 

City of Inglewood, 2006. GIS Data. April. 

5.3-2 




TOPOGRAPHY/SLOPE ANALYSIS 

Legend 

Contour (10' interval) 

Slope 

Up to 5% 

5.1% - 10% 

10.1% - 15% 

15.1% - 20% 

Sources: City of Inglewood, February 2006 and 

EIP Associates, March 2006. 


Miles 


0 0.25 0.5 

Figure 5.3-1

P:\Projects - All Users\D21000.00+\D21146.00 Inglewood GP and EIR\TBR\!Final TBR\5.4 VisualResources.doc Printed on 8/24/2006 8:55:00 AM 

5.4 Visual Resources 

5.4 VISUAL RESOURCES 

This section describes the existing 

visual environment of the City of 

Inglewood and its surroundings. The 

scenic resources within the City 

include a variety of natural and manmade 

elements that serve as visual 

landmarks and contribute to the 

identity and character of the City. 

Although specific visual resources in 

the City are identified in this section, 

it is not intended to provide an 

exhaustive inventory, as the nature of 

these resources is somewhat 

View of Inglewood’s Great Western Forum from Darby Park 

subjective and not easily quantified. 

Existing regulations associated with visual resources, as well as issues and opportunities 

related to the formulation of policies regarding visual resources are discussed in this 

section. 

• Overview of Scenic Resources 

Visual resources are an important component of the quality of life of any geographic area. 

As users experience a place, their primary sensory interaction with that place is visual in 

nature. Several types of visual resources are defined below. 

“Aesthetic value” refers to the perception of the natural beauty of an area, as well as the 

elements that create or enhance its visual quality. While aesthetic value is subjective, it is 

typically included as a criterion for evaluating those elements that contribute to the quality 

that distinguishes an area. Most communities identify scenic resources as an important 

asset, although what is considered “scenic” may vary according to its environmental 

setting. 

“Scenic resources” can include natural open spaces, topographic formations, and 

landscapes. These are resources that can be maintained and enhanced to promote a 

positive image in the future. Many people associate natural landforms and landscapes 

with scenic resources, such as oak woodlands, lakes, rivers, streams, and some historical 

areas. Scenic resources can also include urban open spaces and the built environment. 

Examples of these would include parks, trails, and pathways, nature centers, 

archaeological, and architectural features. 

“Scenic vistas” constitute the range of vision in which scenic resources may be observed. 

They are defined by physical features that frame the boundaries or context to one or 

more scenic resources. A region’s topography can lend aesthetic value through the 

creation of public view corridors and through the visual backdrop created by hillsides. 


5.4-1

P:\Projects - All Users\D21000.00+\D21146.00 Inglewood GP and EIR\TBR\!Final TBR\5.4 VisualResources.doc Printed on 8/24/2006 8:55:00 AM 


Scenic vistas may include views of a range of resources, whether natural or man-made, 

and are also considered important scenic resources for preservation. 

A wide variety of shapes, colors, and textures form the views of and from the City of 

Inglewood, including hillsides, structures, roadways, and vegetation. Some of these 

resources are described below. 


The City of Inglewood offers a variety of 

natural and man-made aesthetic resources that 

are visible to those walking, cycling, or driving 

through the City. Inglewood has a rich 

architectural heritage, and contains a variety of 

building types and designs, representing a range 

of time periods and architectural styles, as well 

as landmarks, such as the Centinela Adobe, the 

Hollywood Park Race Track and Casino, the 

Great Western Forum, the Art-Deco District in 

Morningside Park, and the Inglewood Park 

Cemetery. The preservation and maintenance of 

the man-made and natural aesthetic resources 

are important components of maintaining the 

quality of life in Inglewood. 

Hollywood Park Main Access 

Great Western Forum main access 

While the City includes areas of moderately dense urban development along its major 

corridors, it maintains the characteristics of a residential community, with large residential 

areas along the entire boundary of the City. 

Natural Elements 

Inglewood lies on and around the land known 

in the late nineteenth century as the Rancho 

Aguaje del Centinela. The townsite of 

Inglewood was planned by the Centinela- 

Inglewood Land Company in 1887. The City 

plan was divided into northern and southern 

sections following the patterns of urban growth 

that characterized late-nineteenth through earlytwentieth-century 

Southern California. 

In the present day, the City of Inglewood is fully 

developed and does not contain any wildlife 

areas, rivers, streams, undeveloped watersheds, 

forests, agricultural land, hiking trails, lakes, or 

mountains. However, man made open space 

Landscape elements along residential area 

Inglewood Park 

5.4-2 



such as parks, and landscaped areas are also considered natural elements because of their 

visual importance to the surrounding areas. 

A major focus of the City of Inglewood has been the creation of two basic man-made 

types of open space. One is the traditional city park, providing either active or passive 

recreation. There are ten traditional city parks in Inglewood today, most of which are 

smaller one-to-two-acre neighborhood parks with the exception of three larger parks 

which provide a full offering of recreational and community facilities. These parks include 

Centinela Park (51 acres), Darby Park (14 acres), and Rogers Park (10 acres). Inglewood’s 

parks are further discussed in Section 4.2 (Recreation and Parks) of this TBR, and their 

locations are illustrated in Figure 4.2-1. The second type of man-made open space that 

exists in the City is non-park open space that also provides visual relief from the 

increasing urbanization of Inglewood and its environs. Examples of this latter type can 

include public plazas, landscaped boulevards and even greenbelts between buildings on 

private property. 

Views and Vistas 

The City of Inglewood is characterized by 

moderate hillside areas mostly to the north 

(Baldwin Hills residential areas) and the southeast 

(Darby Park, residential areas along Manchester 

Blvd. between Crenshaw Blvd. and Prairie Ave, 

and south Crenshaw residential areas between 

Century Blvd. and W. 108 th Street), with relatively 

flat areas in the remainder of the City (See 

View from Darby Park looking southwest 

Figure 5.3-1 (Topography/Slope Analysis) in Section 5.3 of this TBR). Elevations within 

Inglewood range from approximately 42 feet to 250 feet from ocean level. With the 

exception of the northern and southeastern hillside areas, the majority of the City 

(approximately 92 percent) has a ground slope between zero and five percent. Views onto 

and across the City include views of the hilly residential areas that are situated in the 

north and southeastern portions of Inglewood and adjacent communities. Inglewood is 

largely built-out and characterized by residential, commercial and some industrial uses. 

Scenic Highways 

California’s Scenic Highway Program was created 

in 1963, and the scenic highway designation serves 

to protect and enhance California’s natural scenic 

beauty and to protect the social and economic 

values provided by the state’s scenic resources. 

Presently, there are no scenic highways officially 

designated by the state within Inglewood. 

Landscape elements along north section 

of Hillcrest Boulevard 


5.4-3


Scenic Drives and Vistas 

Scenic drives can provide views of a variety of natural and man-made elements. 

Sometimes they include views of city landmarks, or wide expanses of tree lined 

boulevards as well as more intimate vistas along shorter road segments. These drives 

provide not only an important scenic resource for residents, but are often the only 

aesthetic experience for visitors. 

Scenic drives are streets in which the presence of high quality landscaping and/or major 

City landmarks lends to a positive visual character. Major scenic drives usually include 

landscape elements that add a distinctive character 

of green space to what otherwise would be a simple 

asphalt street. 

Transportation corridors in Inglewood which could 

be considered scenic drives due to the presence of 

landscape elements and/or major City landmarks 

include Florence Avenue, Crenshaw Boulevard, 

Prairie Avenue, and some secondary residential 

roads such as the northern section of Hillcrest 

Boulevard (between Florence Avenue and 

Manchester Boulevard). These roads often include a 

Landscape elements along Crenshaw 

Boulevard 

median and/or a landscaped buffer between the street curb and the sidewalk with 

different types of Southern California trees, providing the driver and the pedestrian with a 

pleasant visual experience. Scenic drives within the community are described below: 

• Prairie Avenue: The northern section of Prairie Avenue begins at Florence 

Avenue, and travels south alongside the west boundary of the Inglewood Park 

Cemetery. The next major intersection is Manchester Avenue which includes the 

southwest corner of the Park Cemetery, the Western Forum (on the southeast 

corner) and its large asphalted surface parking lot, a 1980s-era Sizzler’s Restaurant 

of standard design (northwest corner), and a 1980s two-story office building and 

structure parking lot. Of these four properties, only the Inglewood Cemetery 

property possesses architectural, landscaping and historical relevance. 

South of the Prairie-Manchester intersection, the entire eastern side of Prairie 

Avenue is occupied by two large surface parking lots: one belonging to the Forum, 

the other to the Hollywood Park 

Racetrack. According to the 

Crenshaw-Prairie Transportation 

Corridor Historic Assessment 

Report, none of these elements are 

of historic interest. However, 

Hollywood Park’s Turf Club and 

Grandstand, designed in 1937 (with 

subsequent additions and rebuilding 

following the 1948 fire) are of 

design significance. The original 

Hollywood Park parking lot along Prairie Avenue 

structure was designed by the 

5.4-4 



Saint John 

Chrysostom Church 

West side of Prairie Avenue between Manchester 

Avenue and Century Boulevard 

architect Stiles O. Clements and the 

site plan and landscape design was 

the work of Edward Huntsman 

Trout, one of the best known 

landscape architect working in the 

Los Angeles region during the 

second quarter of the twentieth 

century. While the main racetrack 

structure sits back a few hundred 

yards from Prairie Avenue, it is 

clearly within view of drivers and 

pedestrians due to its massive scale. 

The west side of Prairie Avenue, below Manchester Avenue to Century Boulevard 

is densely developed with diverse building types and uses, nearly all of which date 

from 1960 or later. Pre-1960 buildings which could be considered of historic value 

include the William H. Kelso Elementary School (1935), the McCormick Mortuary 

(1950), and a group between Buckthorn Street and La Brea Drive of several singlefamily 

residences ranging in construction dates from 1925–1960. Post-1960 

buildings include a gas station, one-story commercial buildings, two and three-story 

apartment buildings, a 1970s mini mall, 

and a smaller 1980s mini mall. 

• Crenshaw Boulevard: The northern 

section of Crenshaw between 

Manchester Avenue and Century 

Boulevard, consists mostly of 

residential properties ranging from 

single-family to multi-family with some 

neighborhood 

commercial, 

institutional, and religious uses on 

major intersections. 

Northern Section of Crenshaw Boulevard 

The southern section of Crenshaw Boulevard, between Century Boulevard and 

Imperial Highway, consists of higher density residential and higher concentrations 

of commercial uses. Landscape elements are present along both sides of the 

Boulevard throughout the City. There is a landscaped green median and a buffer 

zone between the curb and the sidewalk with large palm trees, providing the driver 

and the pedestrian with a pleasant experience. 

• Florence Avenue: The eastern section of Florence Avenue between Hillcrest 

Boulevard and the eastern City limit consists of diverse 

commercial, government, institutional, religious, and 

recreation (park) uses. 

Important resources 

along the eastern 

section which could be 

considered City 

landmarks include the 

Saint John Chrysostom 

Church, the Inglewood 

Park Cemetery, and the 

Eastern Section of Florence Avenue 


5.4-5


Edward Vincent Jr. Park. Landscape elements along the 

eastern section consist of mature palm trees which are 

planted along the north side of the Avenue creating a 

unique scenic setting. 

The western section of Florence, between Hillcrest 

Boulevard and the western City limit, includes higher 

concentrations of commercial and industrial uses. 

Landscape elements are also present along the western 

section. There are blocks which include landscaped 

medians with different types of trees and shrubs. Some 

intersections include landscaped areas with mature trees 

which work effectively as screening elements blocking 

surface parking lots and industrial facilities from 

pedestrian and driver view. 

Western Section of Florence 

Landscaped Areas at 

Intersections 

Manmade Elements 

Manmade elements such as historic buildings and landmarks, freeways and scenic 

highways, as well as scenic drives and vistas are considered visual resources. These 

elements are further described below. 

Inglewood Civic Center 

Historic Resources and Landmarks 

As discussed in Section 5.5 (Historic and Cultural Resources), 

the City of Inglewood has many buildings of architectural, 

historic, landmark, or cultural significance as they are 

representative of and 

provide glimpses into the 

City’s past. Historical 

resources can help to 

define the visual character of an area by contributing 

to a sense of place, maintaining a visual link to an 

area’s past, and providing glimpses of historical 

views. Historic resources in Inglewood are generally 

located within or around the Downtown District 

along Market Street, Manchester Blvd, and South La 

Brea Blvd. Other historic resources around the City 

include the historic Art-Deco District off Manchester 

Boulevard in Morningside Park, and the original 

Centinela Adobe. 

Bookstore on Market Street (former Bank 

of Inglewood built in 1927) 

Historic resources that can be considered of scenic 

value, include, but are not limited to: 

• The Fox West Coast Theater 

• The Bank of Inglewood 

• The Lepper Building 

Hollywood Park main access 

5.4-6 



• The S.H. Kress Store 

• Inglewood Veterans Memorial Building 

• Centinela Adobe 

• Art-Deco District—Morningside Park 

Landmarks can also be found in close proximity to the Downtown District, particularly 

along S. Prairie Avenue. A landmark is a significant reference point, often represented by 

a well-known building or a structure, a landscaped area, or a freestanding element, which 

provides a point of reference in identifying a particular area or destination. Landmarks 

commonly have singularity, allowing them to be distinguished from features surrounding 

them. They also provide visual and functional reference for residents and visitors within 

the community, contributing to a distinct sense of place. Landmarks often have 

architectural, historical, and/or cultural significance. Although they are not officially 

designated as historical landmarks, the following landmark resources can be considered of 

scenic value and provide a clear point of reference within Inglewood: 

• The Hollywood Park Race Track & Casino 

• The Great Western Forum 

• The Inglewood Park Cemetery 

• The Inglewood Civic Center 

Additional discussion of the historical significance of these and other historical resources 

or landmarks is contained in Section 5.5 (Historical and Cultural Resources) of this 

document. 


Federal 

No existing federal regulations pertain to the visual resources within the City. 

State 

No existing estate regulations pertain to the visual resources within the City. 


Los Angeles County regulates scenic open space in unincorporated areas primarily 

through its General Plan and Area Plans. Policies and programs of the General Plan 

directed toward management and protection of the scenic qualities of these areas 

constitutes the Open Space Plan of Los Angeles County. Open space lands may be 

subject to additional controls through special management areas such as National 

Recreation and Forest areas, Significant Ecological Areas (SEAs), mineral resource areas, 

hazard areas, and areas subject to cultural heritage protection. 


5.4-7


Local 

The City of Inglewood addresses aesthetics considerations for development in the 

community in many City documents, including the Zoning Code. The Code sets forth 

specific design guidelines, height limits, building density, building design and landscaping 

standards, sign regulations, and open space and setback requirements. In addition to the 

Zoning Code, several documents have been prepared which include additional guidelines, 

standards, and recommendations to revitalize certain areas of the City. These documents 

include: 

• The Inglewood Downtown District Main Street Project Area 

• The Market Street Renaissance and Downtown Revitalization Plan 

• The Market/La Brea Shopping District Revitalization Implementation Plan 

• The Century Boulevard Fly-Away and Beautification Project Study 

In addition, all residential and commercial development is reviewed by appointed 

Commissions and staff for aesthetic impact. 

• Issues 

• Prairie Avenue has the potential to become a strong visual resource; however, large 

unscreened parking lots, lack of street improvements including a median parkway 

landscaping and onsite landscaping and buffers contribute to lack of visual appeal 

along the corridor for pedestrians and vehicles. 

• Vacant store fronts and lack of maintenance along some of the City’s major 

corridors such as Imperial Highway create visually unappealing environments. 


Cheryl D. Cromwell and Lee Draper Associates, 1996. Cultural Arts Master Plan for the 

City of Inglewood Department of Recreation and Community Services. June. 

University of Southern California School of Policy Planning and Development, 1999. The 

Main Street Organization and Downtown Inglewood Commercial Revitalization 

Feasibility Analysis and Project Plan. December. 

Lauren Weiss Bricker, Marion Mitchell-Wilson, and Janet L. Tearnen, 2000. Inglewood 

Downtown District Main Street Project Area Historic Design Guidelines. May 15. 

Carson Anderson, 1997. Crenshaw-Prairie Transportation Corridor Historic Assessment 

Report. October. 

National Register of Historic Places, Los Angeles County, website: 

http://www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com/CA/Los+Angeles/state.html, 

accessed February, 2006. 

California Environmental Resources Evaluation System website, State Historical 

Landmarks, Los Angeles County, website: 

http://ceres.ca.gov/geo_area/counties/Los_Angeles/landmarks.html, accessed 


5.4-8 


5.5 Historical and Cultural Resources 

5.5 HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 

This section describes the existing historical and cultural resources in the City of 

Inglewood. Historic resources include structures which are listed or may be eligible for 

listing on the National Register of Historic Places (National Register), the California 

Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), 

or any local designation. Cultural resources 

include all forms of public art, as well as 

venues that host cultural activities. 

Inglewood’s historic-cultural resources 

include physical elements, which define the 

City’s past and present and give Inglewood 

a unique identity and charm. These 

resources, when preserved and well 

maintained, provide the community with a 

sense of permanence which fosters civic 

Bookstore on Market Street (former Bank of 

Inglewood built in 1927) 

pride and stewardship among its residents and businesses. Information for this section is 

based on data obtained from the Inglewood Downtown District/Main Street Historic 

Resources Survey (October 1998), the California Environmental Resources Evaluation 

System (CERES) website, 83 the National Register website 84 , and the Inglewood Cultural 

Arts Master Plan (1996). 

• Inglewood Historical Background 

The City of Inglewood was originally designed following the patterns of urban growth 

that characterized late-nineteenth through early-twentieth-century Southern California. 

However, unlike most cities and communities comprising the greater metropolitan Los 

Angeles region, the periods of Inglewood’s development are readable within its built 

environment. Retention and respect for its historic street pattern, the scale relationships 

between the streets and their buildings, and the commercial center of what was initially 

the Centinela Valley, and in later years, the South Bay Region. The decline of its local 

economy in more recent decades has slowed down the pace of change. 

The evolving perception of land in nineteenth-century Southern California can be 

characterized by a gradual change of use from agricultural activities to real estate 

speculation, a process that was aided by the advent of streetcar lines. Inglewood’s chapter 

in this story began with the Rancho Aguaje del Centinela, a 2,200 acre property named 

after the Centinela Spring around which it was located. The creek still flows today within 

Edward Vincent Junior Park. The headquarters of the ranch property, called the 

83 California Environmental Resources Evaluation System website, State Historical Landmarks, Los Angeles 

County, http://ceres.ca.gov/geo_area/counties/Los_Angeles/landmarks.html, accessed February, 2006. 

84 National Register of Historic Places, Los Angeles County, website: 

http://www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com/CA/Los+Angeles/state.html, accessed February, 2006. 


5.5-1


Centinela Adobe House, is considered to be the birthplace of Inglewood. This house has 

since been relocated to 7634 Midfield Avenue within the City. Figure 5.5-1 identifies the 

City’s historic structures. The Centinela Adobe was completed in 1834 by Ignacio 

Machado, who owned it briefly. The property passed through many hands before finally 

being purchased in 1885 by Daniel Freeman, a 

Canadian attorney who had arrived in the area 

in 1873. By 1887, Freeman had become a 

partner in the Centinela-Inglewood Land 

Company. The stated purpose of this land 

company was to create a town near Centinela 

Springs. 

The Inglewood City plan was divided into 

northern and southern sections by the Centinela Adobe House 

California Central Railroad and it was completed in 1887. The southern half of the City 

was bounded by Redondo Avenue (now Hillcrest Boulevard) which formed three sides of 

an octagon; this pattern was continued in a more irregular fashion by the alignment of 

Centinela Avenue which ran through the northern half of the city. Remnants of the 

octagon are found along Hillcrest Boulevard from Inglewood to Florence Avenues and 

Oak Street between Manchester Boulevard and Florence Avenue. Nethermead Park, later 

Centinela Park (today Edward Vincent Jr. Park), a linear park containing Centinela Creek, 

paralleled the railroad track to the north. The grid pattern of the streets located south of 

the tracks was in marked contrast with the 

irregular angles formed by the streets north 

of the tracks. 

The major north/south street leading into 

Inglewood was Grevillea Avenue. The 

narrow, uniform lot configurations of the 

blocks fronting onto Grevillea Avenue, as 

well as onto Commercial (now La Brea 

Market Street 

Avenue) and Market Streets to the east, 

suggest that they were projected for 

commercial development. The prices of the lots ranged from $200 to $750 with residence 

properties priced at the lower range. By 1888 there were several small businesses, a 

planning mill, a brickyard, a projected “College of Applied Sciences”, and at least five real 

estate offices in town. A hotel was built on Queen Street between Commercial and 

Market Streets. 

5.5-2 




HISTORIC RESOURCES 

Source: City of Inglewood, February 2006 and 

California State Office of Historic Preservation, May 2006. 

Date: May 16, 2006 

Miles 


Figure 5.5-1


By 1888 Inglewood had a population of 

three hundred. During the years immediately 

preceding Inglewood’s incorporation in 

1908, architectural development was sparse. 

Most buildings were impermanent wood 

frame construction. The principal 

commercial building was the Hotel 

Inglewood, whose two-story structure, 

located at the southwest corner of 

Commercial (now La Brea) and Regent 


Streets, contained commercial units that 

fronted onto Commercial Street. Businesses addressing the agricultural and building 

needs of the community were located on the west side of Commercial Street, north of 

Regent. These consisted of a blacksmith shop, Inglewood Mills, and storage and repair 

shops. During the early years of Inglewood’s history, Market Street was principally a 

residential area with a street car line that dated from 1904. 

By the 1910s, several churches were constructed in Inglewood. With the exception of the 

First Methodist Episcopal Church at the northwest corner of East Pimiento (now West 

Manchester Boulevard) and Commercial 

Street, and St. John’s Catholic Church at 

the northeast corner of East Pimiento 

and South Locust Street, the churches 

were constructed in the more sparsely 

developed residential area south of 

Nutwood Street, i.e., the Presbyterian 

Church, the Church of the Brethren, and 

the Christian Church. None of these 

buildings survived (though the First 

Christian Church at 215 East Hillcrest 

Boulevard is on the site of the earlier 

Christian Church). The only church that 

Market Street Intersection 

survived from this period, in an altered state, is the Episcopal Church of the Holy Faith, 

located at the southeast corner of Grace Avenue and Locust Street, as shown in 

Figure 5.5-1. 

In the early 1920s, Inglewood’s collection of commercial buildings coalesced into a 

downtown commercial district. The pattern of development shared features with the 

development of other downtown districts in Southern California (and elsewhere 

nationally). The buildings that were constructed have been labeled by architectural 

historians as “taxpayer blocks”, so named since they were viewed as interim 

improvements that would garner some tax benefit until more valuable development could 

be carried out. These were typically multi-unit one- to two-story commercial buildings. 

Offices or apartments would be located above the first story commercial units. Singlestory 

buildings were particularly prevalent after World War I, when automotive traffic 


5.5-5


made arterial routes less agreeable places to live, and apartment dwellers expected some 

off-street space for their cars. 

Most 1920s commercial buildings were constructed on a speculative basis. During this 

period the principal construction materials were brick and hollow tile. Their relative 

permanence (in comparison with wood frame structures) was seen as an indicator of the 

formation of neighborhoods. The exterior design was somewhat more elaborate than had 

been true during earlier periods of commercial development. Surface ornament framed 

the entrance; the parapet above the entry was frequently elaborated with contrasting types 

of brick or terra cotta and the name of the building imbedded into its surface. Pilasters 

(flat, engaged columns) framing double-hung windows introduced a formality that 

connoted economic stability. The interior space of these buildings was characteristically 

flexible since the tenants’ needs could not be known. These buildings were not 

anticipated to be long-term investments. Once they were built, their architectural 

attributes were seemingly taken for granted; distinctive features were usually 

overshadowed by signs. While these features characterized the design of American 

commercial buildings irrespective of their location, in Southern California the advent of 

the Spanish Colonial Revival (which began to take hold by the mid 1910s) created a 

regionally identifiable image. Characteristic features were stucco sheathed walls with 

Spanish tile covering roofs or parapet edges. The theme of the arcade (associated with the 

Mission traditions) was expressed through arched door and window openings; 

occasionally a recessed porch at the entrance would be transformed into a miniature 

courtyard complete with tiled floor and baseboard and fountain. Restrained use of plaster 

or cast-stone detailing at the entrance and parapet gave the building additional visual 

interest. 

In the Metropolitan Los Angeles area, the normal land use pattern was dominated by 

one-story rather than two-story commercial buildings. A similar low-scale pattern 

characterized post World War I downtown Inglewood, with commercial enterprises 

established to meet the needs of local consumers (the 1920 census reported a population 

of 3,248). 

In 1920, Inglewood suffered a severe earthquake. The Inglewood Hotel and the 

Inglewood Mercantile Company, located at the intersection of Regent and Commercial 

were severely damaged and later demolished. The loss of these buildings was graphically 

reported in contemporary photographs. However the earthquake did not seriously 

hamper the City’s growth. In fact, the aftermath of the earthquake was such a spectacle 

that the people who flocked to see the damage were seeing Inglewood for the first time, 

and were so impressed that they came back to live. They liked the climate, reputed to be 

the best in the nation, and liked the quiet little town (the 1922 census reported a growth 

in the city’s population to 7,000). 

Soon after the earthquake, on the site of the Inglewood Mercantile Company, Citizens 

Savings was constructed by a group of local investors. At this time, Commercial Street 

continued to be the primary commercial artery for the city. However, many more 

businesses were establishing locations on Market Street and the cross streets. During the 

5.5-6 



early 1920s, George Lepper, originally from Pittsburg, purchased property at 314 South 

Market Street, as shown in Figure 5.5-1, with the intention of building a shoe store for his 

son. Other citizens derided his expectation that Market Street would become prominent. 

Along with Sanford Anderson, Lepper was a prime mover in organizing the local 

People’s Federal Building and Loan Association. They established their first office in one 

of the units of the Market Street building, but eventually outgrew the facility and 

constructed a new building at the northeast corner of Market and Manchester. At the 

northeast corner of North Market and Queen Streets, the Bank of Inglewood erected a 

Mediterranean style bank building in 1927, as shown in Figure 5.5-1. This was sold to the 

Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association in 1936, and currently functions 

as a bookstore. 

By the early 1920s, signs of the impact of the automobile were showing in Inglewood, as 

was true for other Southern California cities. Automotive repair garages and corner 

service stations were sited at the northern and southern edges of Commercial and Market 

Streets. Detached automotive garages were built to the rear of the dwellings, particularly 

the newer housing constructed east of the commercial blocks, along Locust Street and 

Hillcrest Boulevard. By this period a movie theater had been constructed at the northwest 

corner of Commercial and Queen Streets. On Market Street, the Granada Theater was 

constructed in 1923, and it was later replaced by the Fox Theater, 1948-49, as shown in 

Figure 5.5-1. The new city hall (replacing its predecessor) was constructed to the east, at 

the corner of Grevillea and Queen Streets. 

The 1920s saw the advent of the chain stores in outlying areas and smaller downtown 

districts such as Inglewood’s. These were companies comprised of two or more stores. 

Chain stores enjoyed greater buying power and could therefore demand lower prices 

from manufacturers and retailers. The chains could afford to lure well-trained personnel 

away from other establishments, and they had the means to advertise in local newspapers. 

The chain store helped validate the mercantile strength of the areas selected for their 

development. In downtown Inglewood, the S.H. Kress Variety Store at 233-239 South 

Market Street (see Figure 5.5-1) was a product of the chain store phenomenon. California 

was a significant area for S.H. Kress & Company. Their first store in the state opened in 

San Diego in 1918 and by 1928 there were 28 stores statewide, with more to come. 

J.C. Penney, another nationwide merchandiser had established a store at 139 South 

Market Street (see Figure 5.5-1) in Inglewood by 1940. In 1954 they remodeled and 

expanded their store. The new two-story facility, with its deep canopy and single-glazed 

terra cotta column shared a number of features with other Penney stores. 

The branch bank was another aspect of the chain store phenomenon. It provided services 

previously only available in a major urban center, and in so doing functioned as a stimulus 

for local development. Established banks might construct new branch banks or they 

would purchase or lease existing bank buildings. For years the most formal building in 

downtown Inglewood was the First State Bank (later the First National Bank) located at 

the southeast corner of Commercial and Queen Streets, as shown in Figure 5.5-1. This 


5.5-7


was replaced in the post-war period by Security First National Bank. As noted earlier, 

Bank of America took over the Bank of Inglewood building in 1936. 

Although the depression deeply affected Inglewood, as it did other communities 

throughout the nation, the City benefited from the region’s relatively rapid economic 

recovery. Construction continued throughout the early 1930s. A number of the buildings 

constructed on both sides of the two hundred block of South Market Street date from the 

1930s. Another stimulus for construction came from the Long Beach earthquake of 1933. 

1930s commercial architecture in Inglewood, and throughout the Los Angeles region, was 

greatly affected by the automobile. The automobile changed the perception of how 

buildings are seen in the landscape. During the previous decade, access to commercial 

centers had gradually shifted from a dependence on public transportation, to the privately 

owned vehicle. By the 1930s, architects and designers had developed and architectural 

vocabulary that could express the speed and sensation of the automobile. The ubiquitous 

vernacular stucco box that housed commercial enterprises throughout Southern 

California was altered by popular Modern architectural imagery which ranged from the 

Art Deco of the 1920s to the Streamline Modern style. The Art Deco introduced a zigzag 

pattern of ornamentation around the entrance and window openings and parapet. The 

Sentinel Building (a 1921 building that had its two upper stories removed after the ’33 

earthquake) at 335–357 East Queen Street (see Figure 5.5-1) is characterized by its hybrid 

Deco-Egyptian that frames its upper floor. The Art-Deco style of architecture is also still 

seen today in the City’s only officially designated Art-Deco District along Manchester 

Boulevard in the Morningside Park’s commercial area. The Streamline Modern (popular 

from the 30s to the post-war period) was 

essentially an updated interpretation of a 

classical building and it was frequently employed 

in the design of public buildings and regional 

institutions , such as the Bank of America on 

330 West Manchester Boulevard (see 

Figure 5.5-1). 

The growth of the film industry during the 

1930s presented an opportunity for the 

application of new design to an emerging 

Fox Theater on Market Street 

development of the movie theater. The movie 

palace at 136–144 North Market Street was built as a United Artists Theater (1931), while 

the Fox Theater at 115 North Market Street was built for Fox West Coast Theaters 

(1948/49). 

Inglewood’s economic base began to expand outside the core downtown area toward the 

end of the 1930s. In 1938, the ultra-modern Hollywood Park racing facility opened, 

making Inglewood the home of Southern California’s summer racing season. This 

addition also made Inglewood a tourist destination—a status it had not previously 

enjoyed. Perhaps of greater significance to Inglewood’s future development was its 

proximity to Mines Field, an airstrip located to the southwest of the city. In 1937, the City 

5.5-8 



of Los Angeles purchased Mines Field; they renamed it the Los Angeles Airport in 1946. 

Airplane manufacturers and related businesses located their factories in the area, and by 

the time of America’s entry into the World War II, Los Angeles had become the nation’s 

center for aircraft industry. These 

developments directly affected 

Inglewood’s growth. In 1938, the City had 

a population of 26,000; by 1956 the 

community had grown to 63,000. Housing 

construction naturally responded to the 

increased demand. Within the project site, 

a number of the single-family and multifamily 

residences on Locust Street date 

from the late 1930s through the early 

Hollywood Park Racing Facility 

1950s. 

Inglewood’s Chamber of Commerce claimed credit for persuading Los Angeles to select 

the Mines Field site for its airport. The Chamber’s new building (built in 1948), located at 

330 East Queen Street (see Figure 5.5-1), was one of the most visible expressions of the 

City’s optimistic outlook in the post-war period. 

In response to the increased local economy, new development occurred along the eastern 

edge of Inglewood’s downtown. In 1947, Sears opened a store at Manchester and 

Hillcrest (1947; demolished 1990s). La Brea Boulevard, defining the western edge of the 

historic downtown, was the other area of new construction in the post-war period. 

Sparkling Cleaners (see Figure 5.5-1) located at 320 South La Brea (built in 1948) is an 

excellent example of an architectural response to the automobile. 

While the Fox Theater, built on the site of the Granada Theater (1948-49) was the 

outstanding new building constructed on Market Street during the post-war period, a 

number of existing commercial buildings continued to be remodeled during this time in 

an effort to maintain and attract new costumers. LeRoy’s Credit Jewelers located at 125 

South Market Street (see Figure 5.5-1), is among the more visually interesting. 

By the end of the 1940s, Inglewood followed national trends in merchandizing, which 

favored decentralization, and the downtown area began to lose its primacy as the city’s 

shopping center. By the early 1960s, the city included four retail business areas which, in 

addition to downtown, included North Inglewood, Morningside Park, and Crenshaw. 

After World War II, the influx of defense-related industries, in addition to expanding 

retail areas, transformed the agriculturally oriented town into an urban industrial 

community, which ultimately brought Inglewood its present “urban look”. 


5.5-9


• Definitions—Historic Resources 

Federal 

The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 established the National Register to recognize 

resources associated with the country’s history and heritage. Structures and features must 

usually be at least 50 years old to be considered for listing on the National Register, 

barring exceptional circumstances. Criteria for listing on the National Register, which are 

set forth in Title 26, Part 63 of the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Part 63), are 

significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture as 

present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of 

location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and that are: 

A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad 

patterns of our history; 

B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; 

C. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; 

represent the work of a master; possess high artistic values, represent a significant 

and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or 

D. Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or 

history. Criterion D is usually reserved for archaeological and paleontological 

resources. 

State 

In 1992, the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) was created to identify 

resources deemed worthy of preservation on a state level and was modeled closely after 

the National Register process. The criteria are nearly identical to those of the National 

Register but focus upon resources of statewide, rather than national, significance. The 

CRHR encourages public recognition and protection of resources of architectural, 

historical, archeological, and cultural significance, identifies historical resources for state 

and local planning purposes, determines eligibility for state historic preservation grant 

funding, and affords certain protections under the California Environmental Quality Act 

(CEQA). The CRHR automatically includes resources listed on the National Register. 

Specifically, the CRHR includes the following resources: 

• Resources formally determined eligible for, or listed in, the National Register of 

Historic Places 

• State Historical Landmarks numbered 770 or higher 

• Points of Historical Interest recommended for listing by the State Historical 

Resources Commission (SHRC) 

• Resources nominated for listing and determined eligible in accordance with criteria 

and procedures adopted by the SHRC including 

› Individual historic resources and historic districts 

› Resources identified as significant in historical resources surveys which meet 

certain criteria 

5.5-10 



› Resources and districts designated as city or county landmarks pursuant to a city 

or county ordinance when the designation criteria are consistent with California 

Register criteria 

Local 

Although there is no established local register, different historic resource surveys have 

been completed for Inglewood in order to identify individual buildings and places of 

historic/architectural significance, and determine the potential for a historic district. 

These surveys were prepared according to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for 

preservation, planning, identification, evaluation, and registration of historic resources. 

Each surveyed property was assigned a National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) 

Status Code. These codes were developed by the California Office of Historic 

Preservation and are standardized throughout the state. They rate buildings according to 

their level of historical significance, ranging from National Register eligible to local 

landmark eligible to not historically/architecturally significant. 

It is important to note that properties that are not listed or not eligible to be listed on the 

National Register of Historic Places, may still be considered historical for the purposes of 

applying the CEQA to a proposed project that could have an adverse impact on these 

properties, depending on the results of analysis performed at the time the project is 

evaluated. 

• Existing Conditions—Historic Resources 

Important historic resources which exist in Inglewood today, as shown in Figure 5.5-1 

include the following: 

Listed in the State and National Register: 

The Centinela Adobe House: Birthplace of 

Inglewood. The oldest house in Centinela Valley. Built 

in the 1830s by Ignacio Machado, it has been owned 

by a Civil War General, a Scottish Baronet and Daniel 

Freeman, founder of Inglewood, whose land office 

was relocated to the property. This property is located 

on 7634 Midfield Avenue and is used as a museum 

today. It is a California State Historic Landmark, and is 

listed on the National Register of historic places. 

The Centinela Springs: Listed as a landmark under 

the National Register of historic places; the bubbling 

springs once flowed from their source in a deep water 

basin which has existed continuously since the 

Pleistocene Era. Prehistoric animals, Indians, and early 

Centinela Adobe House 

The Centinela Springs 


5.5-11


Inglewood settlers were attracted here by the pure artesian water. The springs and valley 

were named after sentinels guarding cattle in the area. The Centinela Springs are located 

in Edward Vincent Jr. Park, on the corner of Park Ave. and Stepney Street. 

The Inglewood Veteran’s Memorial Building: This 

building is located in Edward Vincent Jr. Park at 330 West 

Centinela Avenue. Built in the 1930s, it is a California 

State Historic Landmark and is listed on the National 

Register of historic places. 

Other Local Resources 

Other resources which are not listed on the National or 

State Register but may still qualify as historic include: 

Veteran’s Memorial 

The Grace Chapel at Inglewood Park Cemetery: 

Built in 1925, Grace Chapel is a replica of a chapel 

in Edinburgh, Scotland. The Columbarium adjacent 

to it is filled with urns and adorned with stained 

glass windows and ceilings that cast an amber hue 

to the room. 

Despite efforts to preserve these and other 

resources within Inglewood, the City has 

Grace Chapel at Inglewood experienced economic decline over the past decade. 

Many of the commercial properties with historic value are vacant or contain businesses 

which are marginal or underutilized. Additional efforts which provide financial help and 

incentives to revitalize local businesses are being made by different organisms under the 

Community Development Department. 

In 1998 a historic survey was prepared for the area designated as “Main Street 

Inglewood”, located within the downtown district. The area is bounded by La Brea 

Avenue to the west, Locus Street to the east, Florence Avenue to the north, and Hillcrest 

Boulevard to the south. A total of 112 buildings were surveyed as part of this project. The 

results, in accordance with the NRHP Status Codes, are as follows: 

• No historic district was identified for the project area. 

• 8 buildings determined individually National Register eligible. 

• 2 buildings determined potentially National Register eligible when 50 years of age. 

• 1 site determined potentially National Register eligible with more research. 

• 5 buildings determined potentially National Register eligible if restored. 

• 17 buildings determined eligible for local landmark listing. 

• 14 buildings determined worthy of consideration in the local planning process. 

• 51 buildings determined not historically or architecturally significant. 

• 1 building demolished during the survey project. 

• Results of this survey by property are summarized in the Database Master Report 

of the Inglewood Downtown District Main Street Project Area Design Guidelines 

document. The eight properties that were identified as eligible for individual listing 

5.5-12 



in the National Register of Historic Places in their existing conditions are listed 

below. 

• 170 North La Brea Avenue, Citizens Savings Bank: constructed in 1921-22, the 

Citizens Savings Bank, is eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion 

A for its association with early commercial development in Inglewood. Built during 

the city’s rapid population growth and rebuilt after the 1920 earthquake, it reflects 

the continued development of North La Brea Avenue (then Commercial Street) as 

the city’s primary commercial artery. 

• 320 South La Brea Blvd, Sparkling Cleaners: This building is eligible for listing 

in the National Register under Criterion C as it embodies the distinctive 

characteristics of Post-War late Modern style architecture and is one of the finest 

examples remaining in Inglewood. Since its construction in 1948 it has been used 

as a dry cleaners. 

• 330 East Manchester Blvd, Bank of America: The Bank of America building 

was constructed in 1948 and is eligible for listing in the National Register under 

Criterion C as a very good example of the Post-War Modern style in Inglewood. 

The small building at 320 East Manchester was remodeled in 1954 as part of the 

bank and may become a contributing feature of the property as it is also older than 

50 years. 

• 100 North Market Street, Bank of Inglewood: Constructed in 1927 as the Bank 

of Inglewood, this building is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic 

Places under Criterion C as an excellent example of a Mediterranean Revival style 

in Inglewood. The building was sold to the Bank of America National Trust and 

Savings Association in 1936. It is now a bookstore. 

• 115 North Market Street, Fox Theater: The Fox Theater was constructed in 

1948-49, and is eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion C as a 

very good example of a late Modern style movie theater in Inglewood. It was 

designed by the architect S. Charles for Fox West Coast Theaters. 

• 200–204 South Market, Scotty’s Men’s Shop: Historically known as Scotty’s 

Men’s Shop, this building is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic 

Places under Criterion C because it embodies the distinctive characteristics of the 

Streamline Modern style which became popular beginning in the late 1930s. The 

building now houses Cox Menswear. 

• 233–239 Market Street, S.H. Kress Variety Store: The S.H. Kress Variety Store 

was built in 1927 and is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic 

Places under Criterion C for its association with the chain store concept of 

merchandizing which developed in the 1920s. California was a significant area for 

S.H. Kress & Company. They opened the first store in San Diego in 1918 and by 

1928 there were 28 stores statewide. The Inglewood store shares a number of the 

features with Kress stores that were built during the latter part of the 1920s 

throughout the nation. 

• 330 East Queen Street, Inglewood Chamber of Commerce: The Chamber of 

Commerce building, constructed in 1948, is eligible for listing in the National 

Register of Historic Places under Criteria C as it embodies the distinctive 

characteristics of Post-War architecture as is one of the finest examples remaining 

in Inglewood. 

• Since the focus of the existing survey was Inglewood’s downtown commercial 

development (where most historic resources within the City are located), other 

resources located outside the downtown district (with the exception of the 


5.5-13


Centinela Adobe House, the Centinela Springs, and the Grace Chapel at Inglewood 

Park Cemetery) have not been evaluated in terms of their historic value as of today. 

Further survey work and historic research on Inglewood’s resources outside of the 

downtown area is needed. 

• Regulatory Setting—Historical Resources 

The treatment of historical resources is governed by federal, state, and local laws and 

guidelines. There are specific criteria for determining whether historic sites or objects are 

significant and/or protected by law. Federal and state significance criteria generally focus 

on the resource’s integrity and uniqueness, its relationship to similar resources, and its 

potential to contribute important information to scholarly research. Some resources that 

do not meet federal significance criteria may be considered significant by state criteria. 

The laws and regulations seek to mitigate impacts on significant historic resources. The 

federal, state, and local laws and guidelines for protecting historic resources are 

summarized below. 


The National Historic Preservation Act 

The National Historic Preservation Act established the National Register to recognize 

resources associated with the country’s history and heritage. Structures and features 

usually must be at least 50 years old to be considered for listing on the National Register, 

barring exceptional circumstances. Criteria for listing on the National Register, which are 

set forth in Title 26, Part 63 of the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Part 63), are 

significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture as 

present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of 

location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and that are (A) 

associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of 

our history; (B) associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; (C) embody the 

distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work 

of a master; possess high artistic values, represent a significant and distinguishable entity 

whose components may lack individual distinction; or (D) have yielded, or may be likely 

to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Criterion D is usually reserved 

for archaeological and paleontological resources. 

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic 

Properties 

The Secretary of the Interior is responsible for establishing standards for the preservation 

and protection of buildings and other cultural resources eligible for listing in the National 

Register. The 1990 Secretary of the Interior’s Standard for the Treatment of Historic Properties 

document outlines specific standards and guidelines for the preservation, rehabilitation, 

restoration, and reconstruction of historically designated structures. Preservation 

standards and guidelines apply to those buildings that require ongoing maintenance to 

sustain its existence for historicity. Rehabilitation standards and guidelines involve the 

5.5-14 



reuse of a historic structure or property while maintaining portions that maintain historic 

value. Restoration standards and guidelines are applicable to projects that remove 

portions of a building from another historic period in order to reconstruct missing 

features from the restoration period. Reconstruction standards and guidelines apply to 

new developments that replicate a historic period or setting. Each set of standards 

provides specific recommendations for the proper treatment of specific building 

materials, as well as parts of building development. 


State historic preservation regulations include the statutes and guidelines contained in the 

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Public Resources Code Sections 21083.2 

and 21084.1, and Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. CEQA requires lead agencies 

to carefully consider the potential effects of a project on historical resources. A “historical 

resource” includes, but is not limited to, any object, building, structure, site, area, place, 

record, or manuscript that is historically or archaeologically significant (Public Resources 

Code Section 5020.1). Advice on procedures to identify such resources, evaluate their 

importance, and estimate potential effects is given in several agency publications such as 

the series produced by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). 

The California Register of Historic Resources 

As discussed previously, the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) was 

created to identify resources deemed worthy of preservation on a state level and was 

modeled closely after the National Register. The criteria are nearly identical to those of 

the National Register but focus upon resources of Statewide, rather than national 

significance. The CRHR automatically includes resources listed on the National Register. 

Local 

There is no existing regulation within the Inglewood zoning code intended to protect 

historic resources. 

• Cultural Resources 

In January 1995, the City if Inglewood was awarded a Municipal Cultural Planning Grant 

by the Music and Performing Arts Commission of Los Angeles County. A Committee 

comprised of staff from Recreation and Community Services, the Planning Division and 

an administrator of an arts organization was created to select a consultant for the creation 

of Inglewood’s Cultural Arts Master Plan. Major goals to be accomplished by this master 

plan include: 

• Establish an ongoing City government sponsored entity to administer and support 

arts and culture related activities in Inglewood. 

• Integrate arts education into the regular Inglewood School District curriculum. 

• Increase opportunities for community based arts appreciation and instruction for 

youth and adults. 


5.5-15


• Create a multi-use venue or a cluster of venues which can serve as focal points for 

art in Inglewood and provide appropriate spaces for the presentation of the visual 

and performing arts. 

• Create a supportive environment that encourages artists to live and present their 

work in Inglewood. 

• Develop funding and other resources to support the arts. 

• Expand Inglewood’s image to include arts and culture. 

Different recognized professional artists from all of the visual and performing arts 

disciplines live in Inglewood; however the artists have low profiles within the City due to 

the inadequacy of the venues and the lack of funding to support the creation and 

presentation of art in Inglewood. An important challenge for the Cultural Arts Master 

Plan is to provide local artists with better opportunities and funding to display their work 

locally. Some of the existing cultural resources / art pieces within Inglewood today 

include: 

• “Teach Us to Know”—a mural painted 

by Inglewood youth. Inglewood based 

artist Nancy Williams led a group of teens 

through the design and paint process of 

“Teach Us to Know”, a mural which is 

located at Darby Park. The theme of the 

mural was inspired by the thirst for 

knowledge, and the idea that knowing 

should dispel ignorance and 

misunderstanding. 

• Renowned Artist Gift to Community 

Presents a Composite of the Past and 

the Present Mural. Muralist Richard 

Wyatt, whose work is recognized 

throughout Los Angeles County, is the 

creative talent behind the mural located on 

Inglewood High School’s Gymnasium 

north wall. The work is a reflection of 

Inglewood’s modern character, strong 

presence and rich history, portrays a mirror 

image of Inglewood’s roots, the Centinela 

Valley. 

Teach Us to Know Mural 

Composite of the Past and the 

• The Centinela Adobe Museum. Built in the 1830s, it is the oldest house in all of 

Centinela Valley. The property functions as a museum today representing a cultural 

as well as historic resource for the City. The Centinela Adobe Museum contains 

important buildings, artifacts and photographs depicting Inglewood’s heritage. 

• History of Transportation Mural. This mural is listed in the California Register 

of Historical Resources and plays an important role in conveying the history of 

Inglewood. The mural was originally constructed in Edward Vincent Jr. Park in 

1940 as a Works Progress Administration (WPA) project by the noted California 

artist Helen Lundeberg. Today, the mural is being restored and will be relocated to 

Grevillea Art Park on fall of 2006. The mural is 240 feet long and it is comprised of 

5.5-16 



History of Transportation Mural 

(before restoration) 

60 panels, each 7½ ft. high x 4 ft. 

wide, the 2-inch deep mosaic 

elements are supported by a 14- 

inch-thick cast concrete wall. 

• Regulatory Setting—Cultural 

Resources 

On June 8, 2004, the Mayor, and Council 

Members adopted what became the first 

ordinance specifically designated for the 

support of the arts in Inglewood, the Percent for Arts in Public Places Ordinance, 

mandating the following: The ordinance requires that any new development of a private 

structure over $250,000, must provide public arts valued at one percent of the project’s 

value (project’s value is determined by the Building and Safety Division). The provision 

of the required public art can be satisfied in one of the following methods: 

• Donation of artwork. 

• Development of art project or art program. 

• In-lieu of fee payment. 

• Issues 

• The City lacks a local register of historical resources or a historic preservation 

ordinance to protect and promote preservation of the City’s historic resources. 

• The City has not performed local surveys or studies that evaluate resources outside 

of the downtown area that may be historically significant. 

• Many of the commercial properties with historic value are vacant or contain 

businesses which are marginal or underutilized. 

• The pressure for redevelopment continues to threaten historic residential and 

commercial structures within the City. 

• A large number of the existing historic areas have been negatively affected by 

incompatible architectural designs that do not acknowledge the historical context 

of surrounding development. 

• Inglewood has limited venues suitable for the presentation of professional quality 

visual and performing artists. 

• The City of Inglewood is noted for sports and entertainment but lacks recognition 

for artist cultural opportunities 


Cheryl D. Cromwell and Lee Draper Associates, 1996. Cultural Arts Master Plan for the 

City of Inglewood Department of Recreation and Community Services. June. 

University of Southern California School of Policy Planning and Development, 1999. The 

Main Street Organization and Downtown Inglewood Commercial Revitalization 

Feasibility Analysis and Project Plan. December. 


5.5-17


Lauren Weiss Bricker, Marion Mitchell-Wilson, and Janet L. Tearnen, 2000. Inglewood 

Downtown District Main Street Project Area Historic Design Guidelines. May 15. 

Carson Anderson, 1997. Crenshaw-Prairie Transportation Corridor Historic Assessment 

Report. October. 

National Register of Historic Places, Los Angeles County, website: 

http://www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com/CA/Los+Angeles/state.html, 

accessed February, 2006. 

California Environmental Resources Evaluation System website, State Historical 

Landmarks, Los Angeles County, website: 

http://ceres.ca.gov/geo_area/counties/Los_Angeles/landmarks.html, accessed 


5.5-18 


5.6 Air Quality 

5.6 AIR QUALITY 

This section describes the environmental conditions affecting and affected by existing air 

quality within the City of Inglewood. The regulatory agencies responsible for managing 

and improving air quality within the City are discussed along with the regulations and 

plans that have been adopted to improve regional air quality. Informational sources used 

to prepare this section include the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s 

(SCAQMD’s) 2003 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and CEQA Air Quality 

Handbook (1993 edition). 


Meteorology and Climate 

The City of Inglewood is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin). This area 

includes all of Orange County and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, San 

Bernardino, and Riverside Counties. The Basin is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the 

west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and 

east. The regional climate within the Basin is considered semi-arid and is characterized by 

warm summers, mild winters, infrequent seasonal rainfall, moderate daytime onshore 

breezes, and moderate humidity. The Basin is almost entirely urban and its pollution is 

typically related to dense population and associated area sources, heavy vehicular traffic, 

and industrial sources. The Basin’s meteorological conditions and topography also 

contribute heavily to regional air pollution. The mountains surrounding the Basin often 

trap the air and its pollutants in the valleys or basins below resulting in increased pollutant 

levels. 

The annual average temperature varies little throughout the Basin, ranging from the low 

to middle 60s, measured in degrees Fahrenheit (°F). With a more pronounced oceanic 

influence, coastal areas show less variability in annual minimum and maximum 

temperatures than inland areas. The City of Inglewood is located in Los Angeles County, 

which is in the western portion of the Basin. Annual average temperature in the City 

ranges from 55.2 to 71.2°F. 85 Typically, the hottest and coldest months in the City are in 

August and January, respectively. 

The majority of annual rainfall in the Basin occurs between November and April. 

Summer rainfall is minimal and generally limited to scattered thundershowers in coastal 

regions and slightly heavier showers in the eastern portion of the Basin along the coastal 

side of the mountains. The average rainfall measured at the City ranges from 0.1 inches in 

July to 3.2 inches in February, with an annual average total of 13.5 inches. 86 

85 Western Regional Climate Center, http://www.wrcc.dri.edu, accessed April 2006. 

86 Ibid. 


5.6-1


The Basin experiences a persistent temperature inversion. Temperature typically decreases 

with height. However, under inversion conditions, temperature increases as altitude 

increases, thereby preventing air close to the ground from mixing with the air above it. 

This inversion limits the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively 

near the ground. As the sun warms the ground and the lower air layer, the temperature of 

the lower air layer approaches the temperature of the base of the inversion (upper) layer 

until the inversion layer finally breaks, allowing vertical mixing with the lower layer. 

Aside from a persistent temperature inversion, the vertical dispersion of air contaminants 

in the Basin is also affected by wind conditions. The combination of stagnant wind 

conditions and low inversions produces the greatest pollutant concentrations. On days of 

no inversion or high wind speeds, ambient air pollutant concentrations are the lowest. 

During periods of low inversions and low wind speeds, air pollutants generated in 

urbanized areas in the Basin are transported predominantly on shore into Riverside and 

San Bernardino Counties. The Santa Ana winds, which are strong and dry north or 

northeasterly winds that occur during the fall and winter months, also disperse air 

contaminants in the Basin. The Santa Ana conditions tend to last for several days at a 

time. 

The nearest, most representative meteorological monitoring station to the City of 

Inglewood is located in the City of Lennox. 87 Wind speeds recorded at this monitoring 

station average 5.0 miles per hour. Calm winds (i.e., winds less than approximately 3.5 

miles per hour) occur approximately 10.3 percent of the time. The City of Inglewood and 

its surrounding area typically experience a daytime onshore sea breeze. While nighttime 

land breezes can also occur, wind in the Los Angeles area is almost exclusively from the 

west. This regime is broken only by occasional winter storms and infrequent strong 

northeasterly Santa Ana winds from the mountains and deserts north of the Basin. A 

diagram showing wind directions and speeds within the vicinity of the City is shown in 

Figure 5.6-1. The wind rose diagram includes frequencies symbolizing wind directions. 

Each frequency in the figure shows the direction from which the wind is blowing. 

Air Quality Background 

Air pollutant emissions within the Basin are generated by stationary and mobile sources. 

Stationary sources can be divided into two major subcategories: point and area sources. 

Point sources are usually subject to a permit to operate from SCAQMD, the agency 

principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the Basin. Point sources 

occur at a specific identified location and are usually associated with manufacturing and 

industrial processes. Examples of point sources are smoke stacks, boilers, and 

combustion equipment. 

87 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Meteorological Data for Lennox, 

http://www.aqmd.gov/smog/metdata/MeteorologicalData.html, accessed April 2006. 

5.6-2 




WIND ROSE 

NORTH 

30% 

24% 

18% 

12% 

6% 

WEST 

EAST 

WIND SPEED 

(Knots) 

>= 22 

17 - 21 

SOUTH 

11 - 17 

7 - 11 

4 - 7 

1 - 4 

Calms: 12.79% 

Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District. 


Miles 


Figure 5.6-1


Area sources are widely distributed and produce many small emissions. Area sources do 

not require permits to operate from SCAQMD. Examples of area sources include 

residential and commercial water heaters, painting operations, portable generators, lawn 

mowers, agricultural fields, landfills, and consumer products, such as charcoal lighter fluid 

and hair spray. 

Mobile sources refer to emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative 

emissions. Mobile sources are classified as either on-road or off-road. On-road sources 

are those that are legally operated on roadways and highways, such as automobiles and 

trucks. Off-road sources include aircraft, ships, trains, and construction equipment 

vehicles. Mobile sources account for the majority of air pollutant emissions within the 

Basin. 

Natural sources account for a small percentage of air pollutants in the Basin. Natural 

sources include high winds that pull dust particles from the surface and pollen. 

Both the federal and state governments have established ambient air quality standards for 

outdoor concentrations of specific pollutants, referred to as “criteria pollutants,” to 

protect public health. The National and California Ambient Air Quality Standards, 

although different, have both been set at concentration levels to protect the most 

sensitive persons from illness or discomfort with a margin of safety. In general, the state 

standards are more health protective than the national standards. Applicable ambient air 

quality standards are identified in Table 5.6-1. SCAQMD is responsible for bringing air 

quality within the Basin into attainment with national and state ambient air quality 

standards. 

The criteria pollutants for which national and state standards have been promulgated and 

that are most relevant to air quality planning and regulation in the Basin are ozone (O 3 ), 

carbon monoxide (CO), suspended particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ), nitrogen dioxide 

(NO 2 ), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), and lead (Pb). In addition, toxic air contaminants (TACs) are 

of concern in the Basin. Each of these is briefly described below. 

• Ozone is a gas that is formed when volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen 

oxides (NO X ), both byproducts of internal combustion engine exhaust, undergo 

slow photochemical reactions in the presence of sunlight. Ozone concentrations 

are generally highest during the summer months when direct sunlight, light wind, 

and warm temperature conditions are favorable to the formation of this pollutant. 

• Carbon Monoxide is a colorless, odorless gas produced by the incomplete 

combustion of fuels. CO concentrations tend to be the highest during cooler 

winter mornings with little to no wind when surface-based inversions trap the 

pollutant at ground levels. Because CO is emitted directly from internal 

combustion engines, unlike O 3 , and motor vehicles operating at slow speeds are the 

primary source of CO in the Basin, the highest ambient CO concentrations are 

generally found near congested transportation corridors and intersections. 

• Suspended Particulate Matter consists of very small liquid and solid particles floating in 

the air, which can include smoke, soot, dust, salts, acids, and metals. Particulate 


5.6-5


matter also forms when gases emitted from industries and motor vehicles undergo 

chemical reactions in the atmosphere. PM 10 and PM 2.5 represent fractions of 

particulate matter. Inhalable particulate matter (PM 10 ) refers to particulate matter 10 

microns or less in diameter, about one/seventh the thickness of a human hair. Fine 

particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) refers to particulate matter that is 2.5 microns or less in 

diameter, roughly 1/28th the diameter of a human hair. Major sources of PM 10 

include crushing or grinding operations; dust stirred up by vehicles traveling on 

roads; wood burning stoves and fireplaces; dust from construction, landfills, and 

agriculture; wildfires and brush/waste burning; industrial sources; windblown dust 

from open lands; and atmospheric chemical and photochemical reactions. PM 2.5 

results from fuel combustion (from motor vehicles, power generation, and 

industrial facilities), residential fireplaces, and wood stoves. In addition, PM 2.5 can 

be formed in the atmosphere from gases, such as SO 2 , NO X , and VOC. 

• Nitrogen Dioxide, like ozone is not directly emitted into the atmosphere, but is 

formed by an atmospheric chemical reaction between nitric oxide (NO) and 

atmospheric oxygen. NO and NO 2 are collectively referred to as nitrogen oxides 

(NO X ) and are major contributors to ozone formation. Nitrogen oxides are 

commonly produced by the combustion of fossil fuels, such as in internal 

combustion engines (both gasoline- and diesel-powered), as well as point sources, 

especially power plants. Of the seven types of nitrogen oxide compounds, NO 2 is 

the most abundant in the atmosphere. As ambient concentrations of NO 2 are 

related to traffic density, commuters in heavy traffic may be exposed to higher 

concentrations of NO 2 than those indicated by regional monitors. 

• Sulfur Dioxide enters the atmosphere as a pollutant mainly as a result of burning 

high sulfur-content fuel oils and coal and from chemical processes occurring at 

chemical plants and refineries. When sulfur dioxide oxidizes in the atmosphere, it 

forms sulfates (SO 4 ). Together, these pollutants are referred to as sulfur oxides 

(SO X ). 

• Lead occurs in the atmosphere as particulate matter. The combustion of leaded 

gasoline is the primary source of airborne lead in the Basin. The use of leaded 

gasoline is no longer permitted for on-road motor vehicles so most such 

combustion emissions are associated with off-road vehicles such as racecars. Other 

sources of lead include the manufacturing and recycling of batteries, paint, ink, 

ceramics, ammunition, and secondary lead smelters. 

• Toxic Air Contaminants refer to a diverse group of air pollutants that are capable of 

causing chronic (i.e., of long duration) and acute (i.e., severe but of short duration) 

adverse effects on human health. They include both organic and inorganic chemical 

substances that may be emitted from a variety of common sources, including 

gasoline stations, motor vehicles, dry cleaners, industrial operations, painting 

operations, and research and teaching facilities. TACs are different than “criteria 

pollutants” in that ambient air quality standards have not been established for 

TACs, largely because there are hundreds of air toxics and their effects on health 

tend to be localized rather than regional. 

Health Effects of Pollutants 

Exposure to air pollution causes a variety of health issues. Some air pollutants result in 

chronic (i.e., of long duration) or acute (i.e., severe but of short duration). In some cases, 

5.6-6 



exposure to air pollution may cause cancer. The health effects of the criteria pollutants, as 

well as TACs, are briefly described below. 

• Ozone can cause numerous health effects. It interferes with lung function and can 

cause pain and discomfort at low concentrations. Health effects of ozone include 

chest pain, coughing, wheezing, pulmonary and nasal congestion, and labored 

breathing. Studies have also linked O 3 exposure to reduced resistance to infections. 

• Carbon Monoxide competes with oxygen, often replacing it in the blood, thus 

reducing the blood’s ability to transport oxygen to vital organs. The results of 

excess CO exposure can be dizziness, fatigue, and impairment to central nervous 

system functions. 

• Suspended Particulate Matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) pose a greater health risk than largersize 

particles. When inhaled, these tiny particles can penetrate the human 

respiratory system’s natural defenses and damage the respiratory tract. PM 10 and 

PM 2.5 can increase the number and severity of asthma attacks, cause or aggravate 

bronchitis and other lung diseases, and reduce the body’s ability to fight infections. 

Very small particles of substances, such as lead, sulfates, and nitrates can cause lung 

damage directly. These substances can be absorbed into the blood stream and cause 

damage elsewhere in the body. These substances can transport absorbed gases, 

such as chlorides or ammonium, into the lungs and cause injury. Whereas, particles 

2.5 to 10 microns in diameter tend to collect in the upper portion of the respiratory 

system, particles 2.5 microns or less are so tiny that they can penetrate deeper into 

the lungs and damage lung tissues. 

• Nitrogen Dioxide acts mainly as an irritant affecting the mucosa of the eyes, nose, 

throat, and respiratory tract. Extremely high-dose exposure (as in a building fire) to 

NO 2 may result in pulmonary edema and diffuse lung injury. Continued exposure 

to high NO 2 levels can contribute to the development of acute or chronic 

bronchitis. Low-level NO 2 exposure may cause increased bronchial reactivity in 

some asthmatics, decreased lung function in patients with chronic obstructive 

pulmonary disease and increased risk of respiratory infections, especially in young 

children. 

• Sulfur Dioxide is an irritant gas that can affect the respiratory system, the functions 

of the lungs, and irritate our eyes. When sulfur dioxide irritates the respiratory tract 

it causes coughing, mucus secretion, aggravates conditions such as asthma and 

chronic bronchitis, and makes people more prone to respiratory tract infections. 

Sulfur dioxide can attach itself to particles and, if these particles are inhaled, they 

can cause more serious effects. 

• Lead exposure may result in gastrointestinal disturbances, anemia, kidney disease, 

and in severe cases, neuromuscular and neurological dysfunction. Of particular 

concern are low-level lead exposures during infancy and childhood. Such exposures 

are associated with decrements in neurobehavioral performance including 

intelligence quotient performance, psychomotor performance, reaction time, and 

growth. 

• Toxic Air Contaminant exposure can cause or contribute to cancer or noncancer 

health effects such as birth defects, genetic damage, and other adverse health 

effects. Effects may be chronic or acute on human health. Acute health effects are 

attributable to sudden exposure to high quantities of air toxics. These effects 


5.6-7


include nausea, skin irritation, respiratory illness, and, in some cases, death. Chronic 

health effects result from low-dose, long-term exposure from routine releases of air 

toxics. The effect of major concern for this type of exposure is cancer, which 

requires a period of 10-30 years after exposure to develop. 

Existing Regional Air Quality 

Ambient concentrations of criteria pollutants are used by the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California Air Resources Board 

(ARB) to assess and classify air quality in each air basin, county, or, in some cases, a 

specific urbanized area. The classification is determined by comparing monitoring data 

with federal and state standards. If a pollutant concentration in an area is lower than the 

standard, the area is classified as an “attainment” area for that pollutant. If the pollutant 

exceeds the standard, the area is classified as a “nonattainment” area. Exceedances that 

are affected by highly irregular or infrequent events (e.g., uncontrolled fires) are not 

considered violations of standards. If there are not enough data available to determine 

whether the standard is exceeded in the area, the area is designated as “unclassified.” An 

air basin classified as a “nonattainment” area for a certain pollutant can file a maintenance 

plan with the USEPA if the three-year average concentration in the basin is below the 

applicable standards. A maintenance plan demonstrates how an air basin will prevent new 

exceedances of the standards. 

Regarding the national standards, the Basin has been designated as a severe-17 

nonattainment area for eight-hour O 3 , meaning that national ambient air quality standards 

are not expected to be met for more than 17 years. The Basin is also a nonattainment area 

for PM 10 , PM 2.5 , CO and NO 2 . Deadlines for meeting the national standards have been 

set as 2021 for eight-hour O 3 and 2006 for PM 10 . As of early 2006, it is unclear if the 

Basin will meet the PM 10 attainment deadline. The three-year annual PM 10 average is 52 

micrograms per meter cubed (µg/m 3 ) and the national standard is 50 µg/m 3 . The 

deadline for meeting the PM 2.5 standard has not been set. Regarding CO and NO 2 , the 

Basin must achieve attainment by the most expeditious date that can be achieved, but no 

later than five years from the date the area was designated nonattainment. If the Basin 

experiences difficulty doing so, the USEPA may extend the period for attainment by an 

additional ten years. 

Regarding the state standards, the Basin is a nonattainment area for 1-hour O 3 , PM 10 , and 

PM 2.5 . Even though the Basin is in nonattainment for several pollutants, regional air 

quality throughout the Basin has improved over the last few decades as technological 

advancements in pollution controls have offset population growth. 

Existing Local Air Quality 

The SCAQMD divides the Basin into source receptor areas (SRAs) in which monitoring 

stations operate to monitor the various concentrations of air pollutants in the Basin. 

Pollutant levels vary widely at each SRA depending on the location and time of year. The 

highest levels of O 3 and PM 10 are generally recorded in SRAs in the interior valleys during 

5.6-8 



warm, stable periods in the summer and autumn. PM 10 can be generated in large amounts 

by construction activity, especially activities that involve grading of land. CO 

concentrations are highest near heavy traffic areas near large business districts or on 

freeways. 

The City of Inglewood is located within SRA 3, which covers the southwest Los Angeles 

County coastal area. Air quality for SRA 3 is measured at the Hawthorne Monitoring 

Station. Criteria pollutants monitored at the Hawthorne Monitoring Station include O 3 , 

CO, PM 10 , NO 2 , and SO 2 . The nearest, most representative monitoring station for PM 2.5 

is the Lynwood Monitoring Station, located within SRA 12 (South Central Los Angeles 

County). The most recent data available for the Hawthorne and Lynwood Monitoring 

Stations encompasses up to year 2005. Table 5.6-1 identifies the national and state 

ambient air quality standards for air pollutants along with the ambient pollutant 

concentrations that have been measured at the Hawthorne and Lynwood Monitoring 

Stations from 2003 to 2005. 

Table 5.6-1 

Summary of Ambient Air Quality Data 

Year 

Air Pollutants 2003 2004 2005 

Ozone (O3) 

Maximum one-hour concentration 

measured 

0.11 ppm a 0.12 ppm 0.09 ppm 

Number of days exceeding state 

0.09 ppm one-hour standard 

2 4 0 

Maximum eight-hour concentration 

measured 

0.08 ppm 0.10 ppm 0.08 ppm 

Number of days exceeding national 

0.08 ppm eight-hour standard 

0 4 0 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) b 


measured 


35 ppm one-hour standard 

Number of days exceeding state 20 

ppm one-hour standard 

Maximum eight-hour concentration 

measured 


9 ppm eight-hour standard 

Number of days exceeding state 9.0 

ppm eight-hour standard 

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 


measured 


0.25 ppm one-hour standard 

7 ppm 6 ppm 3 ppm 

0 0 0 

0 0 0 

5.0 ppm 4.4 ppm 2.2 ppm 

0 0 0 

0 0 0 

0.12 ppm 0.09 ppm 0.09 ppm 

0 0 0 


5.6-9


Table 5.6-1 

Summary of Ambient Air Quality Data 

Year 

Air Pollutants 2003 2004 2005 

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 

Maximum 24-hour concentration 

measured 


0.04 ppm 24-hour standard 

Particulate Matter (PM10) 


measured 


150 µg/m 3 24-hour standard 

Number of days exceeding state 50 

µg/m 3 24-hour standard 

0.006 ppm 0.007 ppm 0.011 ppm 

0 0 0 

58 µg/m 3 c 52 µg/m 3 N/A d 

0 0 N/A 

3 2 N/A 

Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 


measured 

55 µg/m 3 56 µg/m 3 N/A 


65 µg/m 3 24-hour standard 

0 0 N/A 

SOURCE: South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2006 

a ppm = parts by volume per million of air 

b Neither the California Air Resources Board nor the South Coast Air Quality Management District collect carbon 

monoxide data for the one-hour period. 

c µg/m 3 = micrograms per cubic meter 

d N/A = not available 

The ARB also collects emissions data and compiles them into inventories by county. 

These annual emission inventories show which sources are the biggest emission 

contributors and assist in air quality planning activities. A summary of the most recent 

annual emission inventory for Los Angeles County is shown in Table 5.6-2. Mobile 

sources account for the majority of criteria pollutant emissions in the County with the 

exception of PM 10 . In the City of Inglewood, emissions of criteria pollutants would follow 

the same general pattern as the rest of Los Angeles County with the emission inventory 

being dominated by area and mobile sources. Emissions generated within the jurisdiction 

of City of Inglewood would be only a small portion of the County’s overall emission 

inventory. 

Table 5.6-2 

2004 Estimated Annual Emissions Summary for Los Angeles 

County (tons/day) 

Source Category VOC CO NOX PM10 SOX 

Stationary Sources 95 69 49 15 24 

Area-Wide Sources 107 84 20 139


The most congested roadway segments in the City of Inglewood—those that experience 

very high traffic volumes and low levels of service during peak hours—could potentially 

create CO “hotspots” where the ambient air quality standards for CO are temporarily 

exceeded. Any hotspots would have the potential to adversely affect nearby sensitive uses. 

CO concentrations were estimated at various roadway segments throughout the City that 

currently contain high traffic volumes. CO concentration estimates were based on 

existing Year 2005 traffic volumes. The protocol recommended by the California 

Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and published in the Transportation Project-Level 

Carbon Monoxide Protocol (1997) were used when estimating CO concentrations. It is also 

consistent with procedures identified through the SCAQMD’s CO modeling protocol in 

the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Traffic CO contributions were estimated using the 

Caltrans CALINE4 dispersion model. 

Existing CO concentrations at the analyzed roadway segments are shown in Table 5.6-3. 

Presently, none of the roadway segments analyzed exceed the State one-hour and eighthour 

CO standards of 20.0 ppm and 9.0 ppm, respectively. The State one-hour and eighthour 

CO standards are more stringent than the National one-hour and eight-hour CO 

standards. 

In addition to surface streets, existing CO concentrations generated by traffic traveling on 

Interstate 405 and Interstate 105 were estimated at residences nearest to the respective 

freeway. Traffic volumes were obtained from the California Department of 

Transportation. 88 As shown in Table 5.6-3, one-hour and eight-hour CO concentrations 

along Interstate 405 are approximately 11.6 and 8.2, respectively. One-hour and eighthour 

CO concentrations along Interstate 105 are approximately 10.9 and 7.7, respectively. 

CO levels generated by traffic traveling Interstate 405 and Interstate 105 do not exceed 

the State one-hour and eight-hour CO standards of 20.0 ppm and 9.0 ppm, respectively, 

at the nearest sensitive receptor. 

Existing Toxic Air Contaminants 

Toxic air contaminants are airborne substances that are capable of causing chronic and 

acute adverse effects on human health. They include both organic and inorganic chemical 

substances that may be emitted from a variety of common sources, including gasoline 

stations, motor vehicles, dry cleaners, industrial operations, painting operations, and 

research and teaching facilities. TACs are different than the “criteria pollutants“ 

previously discussed in that ambient air quality standards have not been established for 

them; this is primarily due to the large number of air toxics and the localized nature of the 

adverse health impacts caused by TAC emissions. TACs are typically of greatest concern 

near facilities that store or use toxic compounds. Mostly, sources such as those described 

above are generated from manufacturing and industrial uses. 

88 The most recent freeway counts from the California Department of Transportation were for Year 2004. 

A three percent growth rate was added to the freeway traffic volumes to obtain Year 2005 traffic volumes. 


5.6-11


Table 5.6-3 

Existing Carbon Monoxide Concentrations 

Parts Per Million 

Roadway Segment One-hour Eight-hour 

La Cienega Blvd between Slauson Ave and Fairview Blvd 10.8 6.8 

La Cienega Blvd between Centinela Avenue and Interstate 405 Ramps 10.9 6.7 

La Cienega Blvd between Interstate 405 Ramps and Florence Ave 7.6 5.4 

La Cienega Blvd between Arbor Vitae St and Century Blvd 8.8 5.8 

Prairie Ave between Florence Ave and Regent St 9.6 6.1 

Prairie Ave between Regent St Manchester Blvd 9.9 6.2 

Prairie Ave between Manchester Blvd and 90 th St 9.1 6.1 

Prairie Ave between 90 th St and Arbor Vitae St 9.2 6.1 

Prairie Ave between Arbor Vitae Street and Century Blvd 9.1 6.0 

Prairie Ave between Century Blvd and 108 th St 9.7 6.2 

Prairie Ave between 108 th St and Imperial Hwy 9.7 6.2 

Crenshaw Blvd between Crenshaw Dr and 8 th Ave 9.7 6.3 

Crenshaw Blvd between Manchester Blvd and 90 th St 9.5 6.1 

Crenshaw Blvd between 90 th St and Arbor Vitae St 10.0 6.3 

Crenshaw Blvd between Arbor Vitae St and Century Blvd 9.7 6.2 

Crenshaw Blvd between Century Blvd and 108 th St 10.4 6.4 

Centinela Ave between La Cienega Blvd and Beach Ave 9.5 6.1 

Centinela Ave between Beach Ave and La Brea Ave 9.4 6.1 

Centinela Ave between La Brea Ave and Hyde Park Blvd 9.6 6.1 

Centinela Ave between Hyde Park Blvd and Florence Ave 9.1 5.9 

Florence Ave between La Cienega Blvd and Eucalyptus Ave 9.4 6.0 

Florence Ave between La Brea Ave and Prairie Ave 9.3 6.0 

Manchester Blvd between La Cienega Blvd and Inglewood Ave 9.5 6.2 

Manchester Blvd between La Brea Avenue and Prairie Ave 9.4 6.1 

Manchester Blvd between Prairie Ave and Crenshaw Dr 9.5 6.1 

Manchester Blvd between Crenshaw Dr and Crenshaw Blvd 9.6 6.1 

Century Blvd between La Cienega Blvd and Inglewood Ave 9.6 6.1 

Century Blvd between Hawthorne Blvd and Prairie Ave 9.1 6.0 

Century Blvd between Crenshaw Blvd and Van Ness Ave 9.1 6.0 

Imperial Hwy between Prairie Ave and Yukon Ave 9.5 6.1 

Imperial Hwy between Yukon Ave and Crenshaw Blvd 9.4 6.1 

Imperial Hwy between Crenshaw Blvd and Van Ness Ave 9.2 6.0 

Interstate 405 from Manchester Blvd to Century Blvd 11.6 8.2 

Interstate 105, west of Crenshaw Blvd 10.9 7.7 

State Standard 20 9.0 

SOURCE: TAHA, 2006 

a All concentrations include one- and eight-hour ambient concentrations of 7.0 and 5.0, respectively. 

Sources of TACs that may create an unacceptable cancer risk must prepare a health risk 

assessment (HRA) and mitigate their TAC emissions. The most recent list of sources 

subject to the HRA requirement published by SCAQMD shows that one source within 

5.6-12 



the City of Inglewood (Plains Exploration and Production Company) had to prepare an 

HRA. 89 

The ARB also has identified diesel particulate matter as a TAC. Diesel particulate matter 

is generated from the burning of diesel fuel. Consequently, sources, such as truck-stops, 

rail yards, loading docks or other places, where large numbers of diesel vehicles may 

congregate may present a health hazard. 

Lifetime cancer risk is defined as the increased chance of contracting cancer over a 

70-year period as a result of exposure to a toxic substance or substances. It is the product 

of the estimated daily exposure of each suspected carcinogen by its respective cancer unit 

risk. The end result represents a worst-case estimate of cancer risk. ARB has produced a 

series of estimated inhalation cancer risk maps based on modeled levels of outdoor 

airborne toxic pollutant levels. The most recent map, generated for 2001, indicates that 

cancer risk in the City of Inglewood ranges from 500 persons per million to 750 persons 

per million. The largest contributor to this inhalation cancer risk is the emission from 

diesel engines. This cancer risk is lower than the average cancer risk over the entire Basin 

(1,400 in one million), as presented in the SCAQMD Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study 

(MATES-II). 

MATES-II 

The SCAQMD MATES-II study, which was published in 2000, investigated region-wide 

cancer risk. In particular, this study served to quantify the current magnitude of 

population exposure risk from existing sources of selected TACs. The MATES-II study 

estimates the current average lifetime carcinogenic risk to be 1,400 in one million in the 

Basin. Mobile sources (e.g., cars, trucks, trains, ships, aircraft, etc.) represent the greatest 

contributor. According to the MATES-II study, about 70 percent of all risk is attributed 

to diesel exhaust particulate emissions; about 20 percent to other toxics associated with 

mobile sources (including benzene, butadiene, and formaldehyde); and about ten percent 

of all risk is attributed to stationary sources (which include industries and certain other 

businesses such as dry cleaners and chrome plating operations). In addition, the 

differences in carcinogenic risk from one site to another within the Basin are much more 

driven by the influence from mobile sources than from stationary sources. The levels of 

TACs associated with mobile sources are also subject to strong seasonal variations, with 

elemental carbon (a surrogate for diesel particulates), benzene, and butadiene having 

seasonal peaks in the late fall and winter months, while the lowest levels of these TACs 

are observed during the spring and summer months. 

Stationary sources that potentially emit TACs are regulated through performance 

standards and emission limitations in federal and SCAQMD regulations. Past efforts for 

regulating mobile sources of toxic air contaminants have provided substantial control of 

lead emissions. Diesel exhaust particulates have more recently been identified as a TAC. 

89 

SCAQMD, Annual Report on AB 2588 Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Program, March 2005. 


5.6-13


Improvement of fuel efficiency and reformulation of fuels have in the past provided 

indirect control for TACs from mobile sources. Strategies adopted by ARB in 2000 

provide a framework for future control of diesel exhaust particulates from stationary and 

mobile sources (ARB, 2000). 

Sensitive Receptors 

Sensitive receptors are certain members of the population that are more susceptible to the 

effects of air pollution than the general population. While the ambient air quality 

standards are designed to protect public health and are generally regarded as conservative 

for healthy adults, there is greater concern to protect adults who are ill or have long-term 

respiratory problems and young children whose lungs are not fully developed. According 

to ARB, sensitive receptors include children less than 14 years of age, the elderly over 65 

years of age, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. 

The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook identifies the following as locations that may 

contain a high concentration of sensitive receptors: long-term health care facilities, 

rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, 

playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. 

The City of Inglewood contains a number of each of these different land uses, including 

hospitals, libraries, retirement homes, parks and recreational facilities, public and private 

schools, religious institutions, and childcare facilities. 

Land Use Planning and Air Quality 

The land use pattern and density of development affects the amount of air pollutants that 

are generated in communities. Land uses that are segregated throughout a community 

increase the number of motor vehicle trips and associated air pollutant emissions since 

opportunities to walk, ride bicycles, and use public transportation between such uses as 

homes and work/shopping are reduced. High-density communities often mix residential 

uses with, or very near, commercial, business, and employment uses, thus reducing 

people’s reliance on motor vehicle use or reducing the distance of necessary vehicle trips. 

High-density uses also produce less air emissions on a per unit basis from the use of 

natural gas for space and water heating. The City of Inglewood is a fully built-out 

urbanized community. The northwestern portion of the City near the intersection of 

Florence Avenue and La Brea Avenue contains a mixture of land uses (i.e., commercial, 

residential, and office) that are located in close proximity to each other. Other City areas, 

especially the southern and eastern portions, are primarily residential. As such, the 

majority of residences located within the City are likely to drive to reach their places of 

employment and to run daily errands. 


The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) governs air quality in the United States. In addition to 

being subject to the requirements of CAA, air quality in California is also governed by 

more stringent regulations under the California Clean Air Act (CCAA). At the federal 

5.6-14 



level, CAA is administered by USEPA. In California, the CAA and CCAA is administered 

by ARB at the state level and by the Air Quality Management Districts at the regional 

level. At the local level, cities work with Air Quality Management Districts to facilitate the 

implementation of control measures that were developed by the Air Quality Management 

Districts. These agencies work jointly, as well as individually, to improve air quality 

through legislation, regulations, planning, policy-making, education, and a variety of 

programs. The agencies responsible for improving air quality within the Basin are 

discussed below. 

Federal 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

The USEPA is responsible for setting and enforcing the National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards for atmospheric pollutants. It regulates emission sources that are under the 

exclusive authority of the federal government, such as aircraft, ships, and certain 

locomotives. 

As part of its enforcement responsibilities, USEPA requires each state with federal 

nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that 

demonstrates how the federal standards will be met. The SIP must integrate federal, state, 

and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce 

pollution, using a combination of performance standards and market-based programs 

within the timeframe identified in the SIP. 

State 

California Air Resources Board 

The ARB, a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency, is responsible for 

the coordination and administration of both federal and state air pollution control 

programs within California. In this capacity, ARB conducts research, sets California 

Ambient Air Quality Standards, compiles emission inventories, develops suggested 

control measures, provides oversight of local programs, and prepares the SIP. ARB 

establishes emissions standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer products 

(e.g., hair spray, aerosol paints, and charcoal lighter fluid), and various types of 

commercial equipment. It also sets fuel specifications to reduce vehicular emissions. 

Regional 

South Coast Air Quality Management District 

The SCAQMD is the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution 

control in the Basin. To that end, SCAQMD, a regional agency, works directly with the 

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), county transportation 

commissions, and local governments and cooperates actively with all federal and state 

government agencies. SCAQMD develops rules and regulations, establishes permitting 


5.6-15


requirements for stationary sources, inspects emission sources, and enforces such 

measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary. 

The SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary (area and 

point), mobile, and indirect sources. It has responded to this requirement by preparing a 

sequence of AQMPs. The most recent of these was adopted by the Governing Board of 

the SCAQMD on August 1, 2003, which updates and revises the previous 1997 AQMP. 

This AQMP, referred to as the 2003 AQMP, was prepared to comply with the CAA, 

CCAA, and its amendments, to accommodate growth, to reduce the high pollutant levels 

in the Basin, to meet federal and state ambient air quality standards, and to minimize the 

fiscal impact that pollution control measures have on the local economy. The purpose of 

the 2003 AQMP for the Basin is to set forth a comprehensive program that will lead this 

area into compliance with all federal and state air quality planning requirements. 

Compared with the 1997 AQMP, the 2003 AQMP utilizes revised emissions inventory 

projections that use 1997 as the base year, the ARB on-road motor vehicle emissions 

model EMFAC2002, and SCAG 2001 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) forecast 

assumptions; updates the attainment demonstration for the federal standards for O 3 and 

PM 10 ; replaces the 1997 attainment demonstration for the federal CO standard and 

provides a basis for a maintenance plan for CO for the future; and updates the 

maintenance plan for the federal NO 2 standard that the Basin has met since 1992. In 

terms of working towards ozone attainment, the 2003 AQMP builds upon the 1997 

AQMP and 1999 Amendments to the Ozone SIP. In terms of PM 10 attainment, the PM 10 

control strategy in the 1997 AQMP has been augmented by a number of additional PM 10 

control measures. 

The 2003 AQMP also addresses several federal and state planning requirements and 

incorporates significant new scientific data, primarily in the form of updated emissions 

inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological episodes, and new air quality 

modeling tools. Specifically, the 2003 AQMP is designed to satisfy the CCAA tri-annual 

update requirements and fulfill the District’s commitment to update transportation 

emission budgets based on the latest approved motor vehicle emissions model and 

planning assumptions. 

The 2003 AQMP control measures consist of (1) the SCAQMD’s stationary and mobile 

source control measures, (2) state control measures proposed by the ARB, and 

(3) transportation control measures provided by SCAG. Overall, 28 stationary and 

21 mobile source measures are defined under the 2003 AQMP. These measures primarily 

rely on the traditional command-and-control approach facilitated by market incentive 

programs, as well as advanced technologies expected to be implemented by 2010. The 

proposed control measures in the 2003 AQMP are based on implementation of all 

feasible control measures through the application of available technologies and 

management practices as well as advanced technologies and control methods. 

The basic principles used in designing the District’s control strategy were to (1) meet at 

least the same overall remaining emissions target committed to in the 1997/1999 SIP; 

5.6-16 



(2) replace long-term measures with more specific near-term measures, where feasible, 

and (3) develop new short-term control measures and long-term strategies to achieve the 

needed reductions for attainment demonstration. Principle control measures of the 2003 

AQMP focus on adoption of new regulations or enhancement of existing 1997 AQMP 

regulations for stationary sources and implementation/facilitation of advanced 

transportation technologies (i.e., zero emission and alternative-fueled vehicles and 

infrastructure, fuel cell vehicles, heavy-duty electric and hybrid-electric vehicles, and both 

capital and non-capital transportation improvements). Capital improvements consist of 

high occupancy vehicle lanes; transit improvements; traffic flow improvements; park-andride 

and intermodal facilities; and urban freeway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Noncapital 

improvements consist of rideshare matching and transportation demand 

management activities derived from the congestion management program. 

Southern California Association of Governments 

The SCAG is a council of governments for Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San 

Bernardino, and Ventura Counties. SCAG is a regional planning agency that serves as a 

forum for regional issues relating to transportation, the economy and community 

development, and the environment. SCAG is responsible for developing transportation, 

land use, and energy conservation policies for its members. These policies often affect air 

quality emissions within the Basin. The organization promotes carpools, buses, trains, and 

other alternative forms of transportation throughout the region. 

SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) provides growth forecasts 

that are used in the development of air quality-related land use and transportation control 

strategies by SCAQMD. The RCPG is a framework for decision-making for local 

governments, assisting them in meeting federal and state mandates for growth 

management, mobility, and environmental standards, while maintaining consistency with 

regional goals regarding growth and changes for the future. 

Local 


Local jurisdictions, such as the City of Inglewood, have the shared responsibility to 

implement or facilitate some of the control measures of the AQMP. Transportationrelated 

strategies for congestion management, low emission vehicle infrastructure, and 

transit accessibility and nontransportation-related strategies for energy conservation can 

be encouraged by local policies. A summary of the AQMP measures that are partially 

within the jurisdiction of local governments to implement is provided in Table 5.6-4. 


5.6-17


Table 5.6-4 

AQMP Control Strategies for Local Governments 

AQMP Strategy Name 

Miscellaneous Sources 

Promotion of Lighter Colored Roofing and Road 

MSC-01 

Materials and Tree Planting Programs 

Effect 

Energy Conservation 

Transportation Strategies 

TCM-A High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Improvements Trip Reduction 

TCM-B Transit & Systems Management Trip Reduction 

TCM-C Information Based Measures Trip Reduction 

SOURCE: South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2003 Air Quality Management Plan, 2003 

• Issues 

• The City lacks planning programs that reduce the length and or number of vehicle 

trips and encourage residents to work locally, rideshare, telecommute, or use 

alternative forms of transportation. 

• The City lacks policies that discourage sensitive receptors near Interstates 405 and 

105. 


California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2000. Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate 

Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles, October. 

———. 2004. Air Quality Maps: Estimated Cancer Risk from Air Toxics—2001 Map 

Information. ARB Website: http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/cti/hlthrisk/cncrinhl/ 

rskmapvwtrend.htm, accessed February 2006. 

California Department of Transportation. 2006. Traffic and Vehicle Data Systems Unit. 

California Department of Transportation Website: http://www.dot.ca.gov/ 

hq/traffops/saferesr/trafdata/, accessed May 2006. 

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 1993. CEQA Air Quality 

Handbook. 

———. 2000. Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast Air Basin 

(MATES-II). 

———. 2003. 2003 Air Quality Management Plan. 

———. 2005. Annual Report on AB 2588 Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Program, March. 

———. 2006. Historical Air Quality Data. SCAQMD Website: http://www.aqmd. 

gov/smog/historicaldata.htm, accessed April 2006. 

———. 2006. Meteorological Data for Lennox. SCAQMD Website:http://www. 

aqmd.gov/smog/metdata/MeteorologicalData.html, accessed April 2006. 

Western Regional Climate Center. 2006. Historical Climate Data. Western Regional 

Climate Center Website: http://www.wrcc.dri.edu, accessed April 2006. 

5.6-18 


CHAPTER 6 

Community Safety and Hazards 

This Chapter describes the existing conditions pertaining to the health and safety of 

Inglewood. This Chapter includes the following sections: 

• Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 

• Seismic Hazards 

• Flood Hazards 

• Fire Hazards 

• Hazardous Materials 

• Police Services 

• Fire Protection 

• Emergency Preparedness 

• Noise 

6.1 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL RESOURCES 

This section describes the geologic characteristics and mineral resources of the City of 

Inglewood. In particular it describes conditions pertaining to local geology within the 

City. The existing regulatory framework relevant to geologic resources is also presented. 

This section is based on information from documents provided by the City of Inglewood, 

including the 1995 Safety Element and 1997 Conservation Element of the City’s General 

Plan, and the 2003 Renaissance Final Environmental Impact Report. Seismic hazards 

including a discussion of regional and local faults are presented in Section 6.2 (Seismic 

Hazards). 


Geology 

Prehistory 

During the Miocene and Pliocene periods (5 to 25 million years ago) the Los Angeles 

Basin and the surrounding mountains were submerged beneath the Pacific Ocean. 

However, movement and collision of tectonic plates during the Pleistocene (2 million 

years ago) elevated much of this area above sea level. This seismic activity eventually 

created the land forms that exist today. 

Local Geology 

The City of Inglewood is located within the Los Angeles basin area, in the southwestern 

portion of the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province and the northern limits of the 

Peninsular Range geomorphic province. The Transverse Ranges are an east/westtrending 

series of steep mountain ranges including the Santa Ynez, Santa Monica, San 

Gabriel, and San Bernardino from north to south, respectively. Due to intense 

north/south compression, the Transverse Range in this region is one of the most rapidly 

rising areas on earth. The Peninsular Ranges is characterized by northwest and southwest 


6.1-1

Chapter 6 Community Safety and Hazards 

ranges including the Santa Anna, San Jacinto, and Laguna Mountains in Southern 

California. The Santa Monica and Hollywood faults are considered the boundary between 

these two geomorphic provinces. 

The City is underlain by a thick (10,000 to 12,000 feet) section of Tertiary and Quaternary 

marine and continental sedimentary rocks deposited on an igneous-metamorphic 

basement complex within the Los Angeles sedimentary basin. The Tertiary rocks, 

consisting primarily of sandstone, silt-stone, and shale, are almost entirely of marine 

origin and range in age from Eocene and Pliocene. The Quaternary rocks consist of 

shallow marine sandstone and siltstone and continental siltstone, mudstone, and gravels. 

Mineral Resources 

Oil and Gas Production 

Within the City, oil is the only extractable resource known to exist with the possible 

associated presence of natural gas. The City straddles a line of oil deposits that generally 

runs southeast to northwest from the Rosecrans Hills to the Baldwin Hills, paralleling the 

Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone. Oil production, in terms of the number of wells, was 

greater in previous decades although substantial oil extraction still occurs in the Baldwin 

Hills. Within the City, there is only one remaining active oil well site, the seven-acre Brea 

Oil Company site at Eucalyptus Avenue and Hyde Park Boulevard. Previously, a small 

site operated in what is now the north parking lot at Hollywood Park. It was closed in 

1997. 

The oil deposits in this oil field have been reduced after nearly a century of oil extraction 

but there may be sufficient remaining oil and possibly untapped deposits, for continued 

extraction and even new exploratory drilling. Furthermore, oil extraction technology may 

make technical advances to permit additional production from previously depleted areas. 

Techniques such as the use slant-drilling could allow multiple wells to be consolidated 

within smaller, enclosed spaces that do not need to be located directly over the deposits. 


There are no applicable regulations related to geology and soils. 

Local 


The City of Inglewood has a permit-issuance procedure (Special Use Permit) to evaluate 

any future oil drilling sites based on their locality, accessibility, and potential impact on 

adjacent land uses. Appropriate impact-mitigating conditions of development and 

operation can be imposed to enable the safe extraction of oil within certain areas in the 

City. Additionally, an Oil Well Permit is issued by the City Council for each well within an 

approved drilling site. This permit allows the Inglewood Fire Department to regulate and 

enforce safe operating conditions at each well site. 

6.1-2 


6.1 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 

• Issues 

• No issues have been identified related to geologic or mineral resources. 

• Glossary 

• Alluvial—Pertaining to or composed of alluvium, or deposited by a stream or 

running water. 

• Alluvium—A general term for clay, silt, sand, gravel, or similar unconsolidated 

detrital material deposited during comparatively recent geologic time by a stream or 

other body of running water as a sort or semi-sorted sediment in the bed of the 

stream or on its flood plain or delta, or as a cone or fan at the base of the 

mountain. 

• Consolidated material—Soil or rocks that have become firm as a result of 

compaction. 

• Cretaceous—The period of geologic time from 145 to 65 million years ago. 

• Eocene—The period of geologic time from 58 to 40 million years ago. 

• Holocene—a period of geologic time since the last ice age in North America, 

approximately 11,000 years. 

• Miocene—A period of geologic time from 24 to 5 million years before the 

present. 

• Paleocene—A period of geologic time from 64 to 58 million years ago. 

• Pleistocene—A geologic period which began about 2.0 million years ago and 

ended with the melting of the large continental glaciers about 11,000 years ago. 

• Pliocene—A period of geologic time from 5 to 2 million years ago. 

• Quaternary—a period of geologic time from 2.0 million years to the present. 


Inglewood, City of. 1995. Safety Element of the General Plan. July. 

Inglewood, City of. 1997. Conservation Element of the General Plan. July. 

Inglewood, City of. 2003 The Renaissance Final EIR. November 26. 


6.1-3

6.2 Seismic Hazards 

6.2 SEISMIC HAZARDS 

The City of Inglewood is in a seismically active region of Southern California. This 

section describes regional faulting, historical seismic activity in the surrounding area, 

groundshaking, and other seismic and geologic hazards that could affect the City. 

Information obtained in this section is based on the General Plan Safety Element, the 

Hazard Mitigation Plan, and previous environmental documentation prepared for the 

City. Full bibliographic references are provided at the end of this section. 


Regional Geology 

The City of Inglewood is located within the Los Angeles basin area, at the southern edge 

of the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province, and near the northern boundary of the 

Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province (Yerkes et al. 1965). Most of the Transverse 

Ranges province is mountainous, including the San Gabriel and San Bernardino 

mountains to the east, and the Santa Monica Mountains to the north. The Peninsular 

Ranges geomorphic province is characterized by a series of northwest/southwesttrending 

mountains, including the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa mountains, and faults 

including the Newport-Inglewood Fault and the Whittier-Elsinore Fault. The San 

Andreas Fault is located approximately 45 miles northeast of Inglewood. 

Most of the City is underlain by a thick (10,000 to 12,000 foot) section of Tertiary and 

Quaternary marine and continental sedimentary rocks deposited on an igneousmetamorphic 

basement complex. The Tertiary rocks, consisting primarily of sandstone, 

silt-stone, and shale, are almost entirely of maring origin and range in age from Eocene to 

Pliocene. The Quaternary rocks consist of shallow marine sandstone and siltstone as well 

as continental siltstone, mudstone, and gravel. 

Faulting 

Earthquake magnitude is a quantitative measure of the strength of an earthquake or the 

strain energy released by it, as determined by the seismographic or geologic observations. 

It does not vary with distance or the underlying earth material. This differs from 

earthquake intensity, which is a qualitative measure of the effects a given earthquake has 

on people, structures, loose objects, and the ground at a specific location. Intensity 

generally increases with increasing magnitude and in areas underlain by unconsolidated 

materials, and decreases with distance from the epicenter. 

Several magnitude scales have been developed with the most commonly used scale called 

the moment magnitude (Mw) scale. Moment magnitude is related to the physical size of 

fault rupture and the movement or displacement across the fault, and as such is more 

uniform measure of the strength of an earthquake. Another measure of earthquake size is 

seismic moment. The seismic moment determines the energy that can be radiated by an 


6.2-1


earthquake. The moment magnitude of an earthquake is defined relative to the seismic 

moment for that event. 

Earthquake intensity in a given locality is typically measured using the Modified Mercalli 

Intensity Scale with values of this scale ranging from I to XII. The most commonly used 

adaptation covers the range of intensities from the conditions of a value of I that is 

defined as not felt except by very few, favorably situated, to XII that is defined as damage 

total, lines of sight disturbed, and objects thrown into the air. While an earthquake has 

only one magnitude, it can have many intensities, which typically decreases with distance 

from the epicenter. See Table 6.2-1 for more information on the Modified Mercalli 

Intensity Scale. 

Faults 

The Southern California region is seismically active and commonly experiences strong 

groundshaking resulting from earthquakes along both known and previously unknown 

active faults. Active faults are defined as faults that have caused soil and strata 

displacement within the Holocene period (the last 10,000 years). Potentially active faults 

are faults that have experienced movement in the Quaternary period (last two million 

years), but not during the Holocene. Faults that have not experienced movement in the 

last two million years are generally considered inactive. 

The City of Inglewood contains both active and potentially active faults. Figure 6.2-1 

illustrates the locations of regional faults and fault zones within the City and surrounding 

areas. 

The Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone (NIFZ), sometimes referred to as the Newport 

Inglewood Zone of Deformation, is a zone of discontinuous folds and faults which 

stretch across the Los Angeles basin in a northwest-southeast direction from Beverly 

Hills to Newport Beach. The deformation along NIFZ has been caused by displacement 

in the basement rocks and the overlying 10,000 to 12,000 feet of softer Tertiary and 

Quaternary sediments. The marine and continental sedimentary rocks have been warped 

and faulted forming such hills as the Baldwin, Rosecrans, and Dominguez. Thus, the hills 

are judged to be very young. This structural zone is exemplified by the young age of 

sedimentary rocks involved in the deformation, the observed regional and local changes 

in surface elevation along and across the zone, and the abundance of earthquake 

epicenters over the last 60 years closely associated with this zone. This deformation is 

considered presently and potentially active. 

In addition to the NIFZ, several additional active or potentially active faults are located in 

or nearby the City. The Newport-Inglewood fault extends through the City and runs 

parallel to the San Andreas system and lies partly under the Pacific Ocean. Several 

moderate earthquakes and numerous smaller shocks have been recorded in proximity to 

the Newport-Inglewood zone and have originated on the deeper faults within the zone. 

The Inglewood Fault, one component of the Newport-Inglewood fault, has been mapped 

6.2-2 




GEOLOGY AND FAULT LINES 

Legend 

Alluvial Deposit 

Intermediate Alluvium 

Young Alluvial Fan Deposit 

Quarternary Intrusive 

San Pedro Sand Stone 

Fault Line 




Miles 


Figure 6.2-1


Table 6.2-1 

Relationship between Greatest Measure Intensity and 

Magnitude 

Richter Modified Mercalli 

Magnitude (M) Intensity Scale 

Description 

I Detected by only sensitive instruments 

II Felt by a few people at rest 

3 

Felt noticeably indoors, but not always recognized as a quake; 

III 

vibration like a passing truck 

IV Felt indoors by many and outdoors by few 

4 

V Felt by most people. Some breakage of windows, dishes, and plaster 

5 

VIII Walls, monuments, chimneys fall; panel walls thrown out of frames 

6 

Buildings shift off foundations; foundations crack; ground cracks; 

IX 

underground pipes break 

Most masonry and frame structures destroyed; ground cracks; 

7 X 

landslides 

8 

SOURCE: California Department of Mines and Geology 1998 

VI 

XI 

Felt by all; falling plaster and chimneys; damage small 

Ground fissures; pipes break; landslides; rails bent; new structures 

remain standing 

VII 

XII 

Damage to buildings varies; depends on quality of construction 

Damage total; waves seen on ground surface; objects thrown into the 

air 

through the Inglewood Civic Center, south of Centinela Creek, and is shown to similarly 

extend to the south of the Alquist-Priolo Zone map for the Inglewood Quadrangle. 

Another local component of the Newport-Inglewood Fault is the Townsite Fault which 

extends from its intersection with the Centinela Fault in the Centinela Creek, towards the 

southeast across the Hollywood Park racetrack, and extents approximately to Century 

Boulevard. The Portero Fault is a major local component of the Newport-Inglewood 

Fault and traverses the eastern portion of the City, in a northwest-southeast direction. 

The Charnock and Overland Faults trends northwest-southeast and lies just west of the 

City boundary. Finally, the Transverse Faults consist of five northeast-southwest trending 

faults that cut or intersect the major northwest-southeast trending faults within the City 

limits. These faults are known from the north to the south as the Fairview, Centinela, 

Cemetery, Manchester, and Century Faults. Little geologic data is available on these faults, 

but they are believed to be secondary faults to the major northwest-southeast trending set 

which are parallel to the NIFZ. 

Seismic Activity 

The City of Inglewood is located in a seismically active region of Southern California. 

Five moderate earthquakes greater than M 5.5 have occurred within the greater Los 

Angeles Basin in the last 80 years. These include the 1933 Long Beach earthquake, the 

1971 San Fernando earthquake, the 1987 Whittier narrows earthquake, the 1991 Sierra 

Madre earthquake, and the 1994 Northridge earthquake. 


6.2-5


On March 11, 1933, the Long Beach earthquake of M 6.4 occurred on the Newport- 

Inglewood fault zone. The Long Beach earthquake produced extensive damage to 

unreinforced masonry structures in the Long Beach area while less extensive damage was 

reported in other parts of the Los Angeles basin. This event produced numerous ground 

failures in the form of liquefaction, seismic settlement, and lateral spreading from 

Newport Beach to Long Beach and as far inland as Garden Grove. Recent analysis of the 

Long Beach earthquake shows that the earthquake had a subsurface rupture length of 

approximately 13-16 kilometers (km). The earthquake was centered in Huntington Beach 

at a 13 km depth and had a strike-slip focal mechanism consistent with the Newport- 

Inglewood fault zone. 

The M 6.7 San Fernando earthquake occurred on February 9, 1971. The epicenter was 

approximately 30 miles north of the City and surface rupture was experienced on various 

strands of the San Fernando fault zone, including the Tujunga and Sylmar faults, as a 

result of this earthquake. Damage caused by the 1971 quake led to the modification of the 

state building code and seismic safety standards to reduce structural damage and bodily 

injury during maximum credible earthquakes. 

The M 5.9 Whittier Narrows earthquake, related to the Elysian Park Fold and Thrust 

Belt, occurred on October 1, 1987 on a previously unrecognized fault. The earthquake 

epicenter was located approximately 20 miles north of the City. New studies have shown 

that this event occurred on the Puente Hills blind trust fault. 

The Sierra Madre earthquake occurred on June 28, 1991 along the Clamshell-Sawpit fault 

of the Sierra Madre fault zone. This M 5.8 earthquake was located in the San Gabriel 

Mountains, approximately 30 miles northeast of the City. 

The most recent earthquake of significance in Southern California affecting the City was 

the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, a magnitude 6.7 earthquake that occurred in the San 

Fernando Valley. Approximately 15,000 structures experienced moderate to severe 

damage and several bridges and overpasses collapsed. The epicenter for this earthquake 

was the San Andreas Fault, which is located approximately 45 miles from the City. 

Soils 

The soil types within the City consist of alluvium. Generally, these soils offer poor 

resistance to ground shaking and can amplify some surface motion. According to the 

USGS, mean subsurface shear-wave velocities through Inglewood soils are calculated to 

be 350 to 375 meters per second which is relatively low (loose wet sand is 230 m/second 

while solid bedrock is over 1,600 m/sec). Lower subsurface shear-wave velocities signify 

a propensity for greater amplification of ground motion. 

Geologic Hazards 

The amount of damage to a building does not depend solely on how hard it is shaken. In 

general, smaller buildings such as houses are damaged more by higher frequencies, so 

6.2-6 



usually a house must be relatively close to the epicenter to be severely damaged. Larger 

structures such as high-rises are damaged more by lower frequencies and will be more 

noticeably affected by the largest earthquakes, even at considerable distances. 

In addition to regional aspects of the earthquake hazard, there are location-specific 

hazards that can cause additional damage as described below. 

Expansive Soils 

Soils that volumetrically increase, or expand when exposed to water are considered 

expansive soils. These soils are typically very fine grained (i.e., clays) and can expand from 

small fractions to multiples of their volume, depending on their clay mineralogy. Such 

expansion can cause structural damage to foundations and roads without proper 

structural engineering. 

Subsidence 

Subsidence is the ground settlement that results over time from the extraction of 

groundwater or oil. This is a phenomenon that usually extends over a large area and 

occurs on a gradual basis so the settlement effects on a single site, relative to its 

immediate neighbors, may be negligible as the neighboring properties are also subsiding. 

There is no historic evidence of subsidence problems in Inglewood although an area of 

the Baldwin Hills, one to two miles northwest of the City, has experienced subsidence as 

severe as one-quarter inch per year due to decades of oil extraction. 

Loading Settlement 

Loading settlement is associated with weak, clay soils near the ground surface and is 

generally induced by the weight of buildings. The only area in the City known to have the 

potential for such settlement is along the course of the former Centinela Creek, which is 

partly due to the soil and partly due to poorly compacted fill placed along the creek bed in 

the early decades of the century. Structures built in this area either require construction 

on pilings or require soil compaction to depths of twenty or thirty feet as determined by 

individual site soil testing. 

Seismically Induced Settlement 

Seismically-induced settlement results form the consolidation or compaction of loose 

sandy soils during earthquake shaking. Except for the course of the former Centinela 

Creek described above, soil conditions in the City should not generally have the potential 

for such settlement. The area of relatively loose surface soil in the southern portion of the 

City is quite shallow, overlying well consolidated alluvium. However, soils testing on 

individual sites is the only effective manner to specifically identify the potential for such 

settlement. 


6.2-7


Surface Rupture 

Surface rupture or displacement occurs as a fault breaks the ground surface during a 

seismic event. Generally, this hazard is anticipated to occur along pre-existing faults. 

Surface rupture cannot be prevented; thus, faults are identified with the purpose of 

delineating zones over the surface tract of potentially hazardous faults where construction 

should be avoided. Greatest damage is generally associated with sudden, large 

displacements of earth materials. 

Groundshaking 

A major cause of structural damage from earthquakes is groundshaking. The amount of 

motion expected at a building site can vary from none to forceful depending upon the 

distance to the fault, the magnitude of the earthquake, and the local geology. Greater 

movement can be expected at sites located on poorly consolidated material such as 

alluvium located near the source of the earthquake epicenter or in response to an 

earthquake of great magnitude. Strong ground shaking can damage large freeway 

overpasses and unreinforced masonry buildings. It can also trigger a variety of secondary 

hazards such as liquefaction, landslides, fire, and dam failure. 

Liquefaction 

Liquefaction refers to a phenomenon where the surface soils, generally alluvial soils, 

become saturated with water. Groundshaking packs the sand grains closer together so 

that there is less pore space available for the water. This increases the water pressure 

between the sand grains within the alluvium. These soils therefore, become very wet and 

mobile causing foundations of structures to move, leading to varying degrees of structural 

damage. Generally, liquefaction occurs only below the water table; however, after 

liquefaction has developed, it can move upward. Liquefaction susceptibility decreases 

with depth of the water table, and the age cementation, and compactness of the 

sediments. 

Possible liquefaction of the soils in the City has been significantly reduced due to water 

wells lowering the area’s water table. The City has been classified as having either very 

low susceptibility or—in the southernmost part of the City—low susceptibility to 

liquefaction. The one exception to these classifications is the former water course of the 

Centinela Creek which has a very high susceptibility rating. However, concrete culverts to 

capture water runoff along this course and the lowered water table may have lessened this 

susceptibility. 

Landslides and Slope 

Landslides are often associated with earthquakes, but there are other factors that can 

influence the occurrence of landslides. These factors include the slope, the moisture 

content of the soil and the composition of the subsurface geology. For example, heavy 

rains or improper grading may trigger a landslide. 

6.2-8 



The hillside areas of the City are subject to landslide potential. Surface movements in the 

hillside area could be triggered by rain, a breach in a reservoir, damage to potable water 

reservoirs or pumping facilities, or earthquake. Hillside development has placed additional 

loads on the subsurface bedrock. Erosion and the loss of vegetation during periods of 

drought tend to increase the potential for localized landslides in the hillside areas of the 

City. 


Federal 

Uniform Building Code 

The Uniform Building Code (UBC) defines different regions of the United States and 

ranks them according to their seismic hazard potential. There are four types of these 

regions, which include Seismic Zones 1 through 4, with Zone 1 having the least seismic 

potential and Zone 4 having the highest seismic potential. 

State 

Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act 

The purpose of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 is “to regulate 

development near active faults so as to mitigate the hazard of surface fault rupture.” The 

State Geologist (chief of the Division of Mines and Geology) is required to delineate 

Earthquake Fault Zones (formerly known as “Special Studies Zones” prior to January 1, 

1994) along known active faults. Cities and counties affected by the zones must regulate 

certain development within the zones. They must withhold development permits for sites 

within the zones until geologic investigations demonstrate that the sites are not 

threatened by surface displacement from future faulting. Typically, structures for human 

occupancy are not allowed within 50 feet of the trace of an active fault. 

Occupational Safety and Health Act 

Site safety requirements are generally based on specifications of the Occupational Safety 

and Health Administration (OSHA), in accordance with the Occupational Safety and 

Health Act (1970, amended through 1998). OSHA standards relevant to geologic 

resources are focused on worker safety during excavation (see CFR Section 29 Part 1926). 

California Building Code 

The state of California provides a minimum standard for building design through the 

California Building Code (CBC). The CBC is based on the UBC, with amendments for 

California conditions. 

Chapter 23 of the CBC contains specific requirements for seismic safety. Chapter 29 of 

the CBC regulates excavation, foundations, and retaining walls. Chapter 33 of the CBC 


6.2-9


contains specific requirements pertaining to site demolition, excavation, and construction 

to protect people and property from hazards associated with excavation cave-ins and 

falling debris or construction materials. Chapter 70 of the CBC regulates grading 

activities, including drainage and erosion control. Construction activities are subject to 

occupational safety standards for excavation, shoring, and trenching as specified in Cal- 

OSHA regulations (Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and in 

Section A33 of the CBC. 

Chapter 16A, Division IV of the California Building Code (CBC), entitled “Earthquake 

Design,” states that the “purpose of the earthquake provisions herein is primarily to 

safeguard against major structural failures or loss of life.” The CBC and Uniform Building 

Code (UBC) regulates the design and construction of excavations, foundations, building 

frames, retaining walls, and other building elements to mitigate the effects of seismic 

shaking and adverse soil conditions. The procedures and limitations for the design of 

structures are based on site characteristics, occupancy type, configuration, structural 

system, height, and seismic zoning. Seismic zones are mapped areas (Figure 16A-2 of the 

CBC and Figure 16-2 of the UBC) that are based on proximity to known active faults and 

the potential for future earthquakes and intensity of seismic shaking. Seismic zones range 

from 0 to 4, with areas mapped as Zone 4 being potentially subject to the highest 

accelerations due to seismic shaking and the shortest recurrence intervals. 

Regional 

Southern California Association of Governments 

Regional, multi-agency planning efforts are summarized by the Southern California 

Association of Governments (SCAG 1996). Among policies aimed at managing regional 

growth, and relevant to geologic resources, is the following: 

• Policy 3.22—Discourage development, or encourage the use of special design 

requirements, in areas with steep slopes, high fire, flood and seismic hazards. 

Seismic Hazards Mapping Act 

CDMG also provides guidance with regard to seismic hazards. Under CDMG’s Seismic 

Hazards Mapping Act, seismic hazard zones are to be identified and mapped to assist 

local governments in land use planning. The intent of this publication is to protect the 

public from the effects of strong ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, ground failure, 

or other hazards caused by earthquakes. In addition, CDMG’s Special Publications 117, 

“Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California,” provides 

guidance for the evaluation and mitigation of earthquake-related hazards for projects 

within designated zones of required investigations. 

6.2-10 



Local 

Building Code of the City of Inglewood 

Implementation of earthquake mitigation policy most often takes place at the local 

government level. The City of Inglewood Department of Building and Safety enforces 

building codes pertaining to earthquake hazards. The Inglewood Municipal Code 

incorporates the Uniform Building Code provisions in Chapter 11. These ordinances 

reference applicable standards and documentation requirements found in the California 

Building Code that address seismic safety. 

The City of Inglewood Planning Department enforces the zoning and land use 

regulations relating to earthquake hazards in accordance with the Safety Element of the 

General Plan. The Inglewood Municipal Code incorporates in Chapter 12 reference to 

suitability of open space designation for land susceptible to seismic hazards. 

Generally, these codes seek to discourage development in areas that could be prone to 

flooding, landslide, wildfire and/or seismic hazards; and where development is permitted, 

that the applicable construction standards are met. Developers in hazard-prone areas are 

required to retain a qualified professional engineer to evaluate level of risk on the site and 

recommend appropriate mitigation measures. 

Coordination among Building Officials 

The City of Inglewood Building Code sets the minimum design and construction 

standards for new buildings. In June 2003, the City of Inglewood adopted the most 

recent seismic standards (CBC 2001) in its building code, which requires that new 

buildings be built at a higher seismic standard. Since 1988 the City of Inglewood also 

requires that site-specific seismic hazard investigations be performed for new essential 

facilities, major structures, hazardous facilities, and special occupancy structures such as 

schools, hospitals, and emergency response facilities. 

Municipal Code Section 11-130. Earthquake Hazard Reduction in Existing Buildings 

This section of the City’s Municipal Code promotes public safety and welfare by reducing 

the risk of death or injury that may result from the effects of earthquakes on unreinforced 

masonry-bearing-wall buildings constructed prior to 1934 or any unreinforced masonry 

building located in the City of Inglewood. Such buildings have been widely recognized for 

sustaining life-hazardous damage, including partial or complete collapse during moderate 

to strong earthquakes. The section sets forth the minimum standards for structural 

seismic resistance established primarily to reduce the risk of life loss or injury. 

Compliance with these standards will not necessarily prevent loss of life or injury or 

prevent earthquake damage to rehabilitated buildings. This section provides systematic 

procedures and standards or identification and classification of unreinforced masonrybearing- 

wall buildings based on their present use. Priorities, time periods and standards 

are also established under which these buildings are required to be structurally analyzed 


6.2-11


and anchored. Where the analysis finds deficiencies, the building must be strengthened or 

demolished. 

• Issues 

• The City of Inglewood is located within a seismically active region. Therefore, 

existing and future developments within the City are likely to be subject to potential 

seismic hazards, including subsidence, landsliding, and liquefaction depending on 

their location. 

• Many public and private buildings, including the Civic Center, Inglewood Police 

Headquarters, County Superior Court Buildings and office, commercial and 

recreational structures were designed or built prior to 1973 and lack seismic 

retrofitting. 

• Glossary 

• Active fault—As defined by the California Division of Mines and Geology, a fault 

that has shown displace within Holocene time (last 11,000 years). For planning 

purposes, such faults can be expected to move within the next hundred years. 

• Blind thrust fault—A thrust fault that does not rupture all the way up to the 

surface so there is no evidence of it on the ground. It is "buried" under the 

uppermost layers of rock in the crust. 

• Earthquake—Perceptible trembling to violent shaking of the ground, produced by 

sudden displacement of rock below and at the earth’s surface. 

• Epicenter—An area of the surface of the earth directly above the focus (true 

center of an earthquake, within which the strain energy is first converted to elastic 

wave energy of an earthquake. 

• Erosion—Movement of material (such as soil) from one place to another on the 

earth’s surface. Agents of movement include water, ice, wind, and gravity. 

• Expansive soils—Expansive soils are those that greatly increase in volume when 

they absorb water and shrink when they dry out. 

• Fault—A fracture in the earth’s crust accompanied by a displacement of one side 

with respect to the other and in a direction parallel to the fracture. 

• Fault system—Two or more interconnecting fault sets. 

• Fault trace—The intersection of a fault with the earth’s surface. 

• Fault zone—A zone in which surface disruption or rock fracture has occurred due 

to movement along a fault. A fault zone may be expressed as an area with 

numerous small fractures, breccia (essentially, fractured rock) as a fault gouge. A 

fault zone may be anywhere from a few meters or yards) to two or more kilometers 

(1 mile or more) wide. 

• Ground failure—Mudslide, landslide, liquefaction, of the seismic compaction of 

soils. 

• Ground shaking—When movement occurs along a fault, the energy generated is 

released as waves, which cause groundshaking. Groundshaking intensity varies with 

the magnitude of the earthquake, the distance from the epicenter, and the type of 

rock or sediment through which the seismic waves move. The strongest ground 

motion, or groundshaking, typically occurs near the epicenter of the earthquake and 

attenuates (diminishes) as the seismic waves move away from the epicenter. In 

general, loose or soft saturated sediments amplify groundshaking more than dense 

or stiff soils or bedrock materials. 

6.2-12 



• Inactive fault—A fault which shows no evidence of movement in recent geologic 

time and no potential for movement in the relatively near future. 

• Intensity (of an earthquake)—A measure of the effects of earthquake waves on 

people, structures, and earth’s surface at a particular place. The intensity at a 

specific point depends not only upon the strength of the earthquake, or the 

earthquake magnitude, but also upon the distance from the point to the epicenter 

and the local geology. Intensity may be contrasted with magnitude, which is a 

measure of the total energy released by an earthquake. 

• Landslide—A general term for relatively rapid mass movement, such as slump, 

rock slide, debris slide, mudflow, and earthflow. 

• Liquefaction—A process whereby soil is temporarily transformed to a fluid form 

during intense and prolonged ground shaking or because of a sudden shock or 

strain. 

• Magnitude (earthquake)—A measure of the strength of an earthquake or the 

strain energy released by it, as determined by seismographic observations and 

mathematical calculations. 

• Potentially active fault—As defined by the California Division of Mines and 

Geology, a fault that has shown displacement during Quaternary time (last 2.0 

million years), but not during the Holocene. 

• Seismic—Pertaining to earthquake or earth vibration, including those that are 

artificially induced. 

• Subsidence—Gradual settling or sinking of the earth=s surface with little or no 

horizontal motion, usually as the result of the withdrawal of oil, natural gas, or 

groundwater, or hydrocompaction. 

• Surface Rupture—An observable break in the ground surface and associated 

deformation resulting from movement along a fault. 


Inglewood, City of. 1995. City of Inglewood General Plan, Safety Element. July. 

Inglewood, City of. 2004. Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan, Earthquake Hazards in Southern 

California. September 24. 

Inglewood, City of. 2003. The Renaissance Final Environmental Impact Report, SCH 

2003031041. November. 


6.2-13

6.3 Flood Hazards 

6.3 FLOOD HAZARDS 

This section describes the existing flood hazards within Inglewood, as well as the flood 

protection measures provided by federal, state, and local programs. In addition, federal, 

state, and local regulations pertaining to flood hazards are presented. Flood hazards are 

an important consideration to the General Plan Update because protective measures and 

planning can provide a reliable and safe environment for City’s economic health and 

future development. The information for this section comes from a variety of documents, 

including correspondence with the City’s Department of Public Works, the City’s 2004 

Hazard Mitigation Action Plan and the County of Los Angeles Department of Public 

Works Watershed Management Program. 


Surface Water Drainage 

The City of Inglewood is located within the upper boundaries of both the Ballona Creek 

Watershed and the Dominguez Watersheds, as shown in Figure 5.2-1 (Watersheds) of 

Section 5.2 of this TBR. The majority of the City is located within the Dominguez 

Watershed and drains southward into the Dominguez Channel and ultimately into the 

Los Angeles Harbor. However, most of the northern areas of the City (generally the area 

north of Manchester Boulevard 90 ) drain westward into Centinela Creek that then flows 

west into the Ballona Creek. Additionally, the northern part of the Morningside Park 

neighborhood drains northward into Ballona Creek and ultimately into the Santa Monica 

Bay. Section 5.2 (Hydrology and Water Quality) contains additional information on the 

City’s hydrologic setting. 

The Dominguez Watershed is comprised of approximately 110 square miles of land in 

the southern portion of Los Angeles County. 96 percent of its total area is developed and 

the overall watershed land use is predominantly residential. Rather than being defined by 

the natural topography of its drainage area, the Dominguez watershed boundary is 

defined by a complex network of storm drains and smaller flood control channels. The 

Dominguez Channel extends from the Los Angeles International Airport to the Los 

Angeles Harbor and drains large if not all portions of the cities of Inglewood, 

Hawthorne, El Segundo, Gardena, Lawndale, Redondo Beach, Torrance, Carson and Los 

Angeles. 91 

The Ballona Creek Watershed is approximately 130 square miles; the major tributaries to 

Ballona Creek include Centinela Creek, Sepulveda Canyon Channel, Benedict Canyon 

Channel, and numerous storm drains. Due to the extensive modifications of Ballona 

90 County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Ballona Creek Watershed Master Plan, 2006, Website: 

http://www.ladpw.org/wmd/watershed/bc/bcmp/masterplan.cfm, accessed March 16, 2006 

91 County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Dominguez Watershed Current Conditions, 2006. 

Website: http://www.ladpw.org/wmd/watershed/DC/current_cond.cfm, accessed March 16, 2006. 


6.3-1


Creek and its tributaries, natural hydrologic functions have been significantly reduced 

within the Watershed. Approximately 40 percent of the Watershed is covered by 

impervious surfaces 92 . 

Rainfall 

The climate of the area is generally mild, as is typical of Mediterranean climate regions. 

Rainfall events normally occur during the wet winter months, between November and 

April. However, the region is subject to wide variations in annual rainfall, exemplified by 

the drought conditions of the late 1980’ and the extreme wet years of the late 1990’s. In 

1989 and 1990, the City received less than 5.5 inches of rainfall, while in the El Nino year 

of 1998, the City received twice its annual average with 27.06 inches of rain. The annual 

average for the past 88 years has been 13.38 inches. 93 

Drainage Facilities 

The City of Inglewood has approximately 54 miles of reinforced concrete pipe storm 

drains and 1157 catch basins to convey storm water. 94 This system collects all runoff and 

carries from the City and eventually to the Pacific Ocean. The City is currently 

undergoing a comprehensive Storm Drain Master Study Plan to assess existing facilities 

and address future needs. The Master Plan is scheduled for completion by the end of 

2006. 95 Section 3.3 (Storm Drains) contains additional information on the City’s drainage 

facilities. 

Flooding 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as part of its responsibilities to 

carry out the National Flood Insurance Program, has mapped most of the flood risk areas 

within the United States. These maps, called Flood Insurance Rate Maps, depicting flood 

hazards across the United States. The maps show “special flood hazard areas” for those 

areas that are affected by a flood having a one-percent chance of occurrence in a given 

year. The special flood hazard areas are shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps with 

flood zone designations that begin with the letter A or V. By law, federally regulated 

lending institutions must require the purchase of flood insurance for mortgages on 

buildings shown in the special flood hazard areas on these maps. Outside of the special 

flood hazard areas, flood zone designations B, C, and X identify areas of moderate or 

minimal hazard from the principal source of flooding. FEMA has designated the city of 

Inglewood under Flood Zone “C,” which does not require mandatory flood mitigation 

92 County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Dominguez Watershed Current Conditions, 2006. 

Website: http://www.ladpw.org/wmd/watershed/DC/current_cond.cfm, accessed March 16, 2006. 

93 Inglewood, City of. 2005 Urban Water Management Plan. December. 

94 http://www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/pw/divisions/water_works/storm_water/storm_h2o.asp. 

Accessed March 16, 2006. 

95 Conversation with Eugene Parker, Inglewood Department of Public Works, March 20, 2006. 

6.3-2 


6.3 Flood Hazards 

enforcement as there is a less then one percent chance of a flood occurring within the 

City in any given year. 96 

As previously stated, the City is situated mostly in the upper reaches of two local 

watersheds and is not located in any identified 50-year, 100-year or 500-year flood plain. 

Therefore, the risks associated with flooding in the City tend to be localized and would 

most likely occur when the amount of water generated from rainfall and runoff exceeds 

the capacity of the storm drain system. In order to reduce the likelihood of localized 

flooding, the Storm Drain Maintenance Staff regularly clears the catch basins and drains 

of foliage, garbage, and other obstructions to allow the free flow of runoff to prepare for 

and prevent flooding. 97 

Two specific intersections have been identified as being subject to flooding during 

heavier than average rain event. The intersection of West Century Boulevard and South 

Inglewood Avenue and the intersection of West Beach Avenue and Evergreen Street 

flood on a regular basis. The City is presently analyzing this issue and it will be addressed 

in the Storm Drain Master Study Plan 98 . 

Dams and Reservoir Inundation 

Dam and reservoir failures can result from a number of causes, both manmade and 

natural. An earthquake, erosion of the foundation, improper siting, structural or design 

flaws and rising floodwaters, individually or in a combination, can result in the release of 

large amounts of water. 

The City has two reservoirs that act as storage for the booster pump stations: the North 

Inglewood and Morningside Reservoirs. Each reservoir is about 18 feet to 20 feet deep, 

but the reservoir levels are maintained below 3.5 feet to ensure circulation and maintain 

adequate disinfectant residuals in the system. The North Inglewood Reservoir was 

constructed in 1974, and is a covered underground reservoir totaling approximately 144 

feet wide and 221 feet long. While its total capacity is approximately 4.6 million gallons, 

the reservoir level is currently operated between 1.0 and 3.5 feet. The Morningside 

Reservoir was constructed in 1954, and has a total capacity of 16 million gallons. The 

reservoir level is currently operated between 0.5 and 2.5 feet. As both reservoirs are 

below-ground storage facilities, there is no risk of flooding or inundation due to reservoir 

failure. 99 

96 http://www.cityofinglewood.org/faqs/categoryqna.asp?id=13 Accessed March 16, 2006. 

97 http://www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/pw/divisions/water_works/storm_water/storm_h2o.asp. 

Accessed March 16, 2006. 

98 Conversation with Eugene Parker, Inglewood Department of Public Works, March 20, 2006 

99 Conversation with Eugene Parker, Inglewood Department of Public Works, March 20, 2006 


6.3-3



State 

California Water Code 

California law makes local governmental agencies responsible for flood control. 

Section 8401, paragraph (c), of the California Water Code states, “The primary 

responsibility for planning, adoption, and enforcement of land use regulations to 

accomplish flood plain management rests with local levels of government.” Locally, 

Inglewood falls under the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, 

which regulates and plans flood control activity in Los Angeles County. 

• Issues 

Based upon research and conversations with Department of Public Works staff, the 

following is a list of issues that the City faces regarding Flood Hazards. 

• Inglewood is highly urbanized and the majority of the ground coverage consists of 

impervious surfaces, which can lead to an increase in volume and velocity of runoff 

after a rainfall event, increasing the potential for flood hazards. 

• The City lacks a plan to address mitigation in areas of historical flooding during 

large storm events. 


ESRI Hazard Information and Awareness. 2006. Website: 

http://www.esri.com/hazards/index.html, accessed March 16. 

Inglewood, City of. 2005 Urban Water Management Plan. December. 

—— City of Inglewood, 2004. Hazard Mitigation Plan. 

—— Public Works Department. 2006. Storm H2O. Website: 

http://www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/pw/divisions/water_works/storm_water/st 

orm_h2o.asp Accessed March 16. 

—— Frequently Asked Questions. 2006. Website: 

http://www.cityofinglewood.org/faqs/categoryqna.asp?id=13 Accessed March 16. 

Parker, Eugene. 2006. Conversation with Inglewood Department of Public Works, 

Stormwater Runoff Investigation Inspector Unit. March 20. 

6.3-4 


6.4 Fire Hazards 

6.4 FIRE HAZARDS 

This section provides a general description of the fire hazards that exist within 

Inglewood. Fire and emergency services for urban fire prevention are discussed in 

Section 6.7 (Fire Services) of this Technical Background Report. Information for this 

section was obtained from the City’s 2004 Hazard Mitigation Plan. 


Background 

Major fires are generally classified as two types: wildland fire and urban fire. Wildfire 

hazard areas are commonly identified in regions of the wildland/urban interface. 

However, the City of Inglewood is an entirely built-out urban community that is 

characterized by a mix of residential, commercial, and industrial areas. Because no 

wildland areas exist within the City boundaries, this section focuses on the potential for 

urban fire hazards. 

Urban Fire Hazard 

Communities that don’t have an urban/wildland interface, such as the City of Inglewood, 

are much less likely to experience a catastrophic fire. However, the potential still exists for 

large urban fires to occur, particularly after a major disaster such as an earthquake. 

Elements that would hamper fire-fighting capabilities in urban areas include the 

following: density of wooden structures, limited personnel and equipment to address 

multiple fires, debris blocking the access of fire-fighting equipment, and a limited water 

supply. 100 

The Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) has stated that there are no specific 

areas in the City of Inglewood that are more vulnerable to fire than others. High-rise, 

multi-story buildings could present more challenges for fighting fires because they have a 

potential for logistical difficulties due to their increased demand for more personnel and 

manpower; however, there are no reoccurring areas in Inglewood with fire problems. All 

areas are equally accessible in the City. 101 

Additionally, the LACFD is not aware of any specific buildings that are at risk for fire 

hazards within the City. Fortunately, most large structures in the City were constructed in 

recent decades and have standard fire prevention features such as: fire stairwells and exits; 

adequate exterior clearances and accessibility for fire fighting equipment; and interior fire 

sprinkler systems. In addition, residential structures throughout the City have set-backs 

from property lines, which separate adjacent structures and minimize the potential for fire 

100 http://www.eqe.com/publications/revf93/firefoll.htm 

101 

LACFD, 2006. Verbal communication with Mark Bennett, Active Division Fire Chief, 

March 2006. 


6.4-1


spread. The City’s extensive grid pattern of streets provides a natural system of 

“firebreaks” in both commercial and residential areas in addition to accessibility for fire 

fighting equipment. 

As discussed in more detail in Section 2.3 (Housing) of this TBR, the City of Inglewood 

has a relatively old housing stock, with approximately 26.8 percent of units built prior to 

1950. This relatively old housing stock is likely to have a significant number of units in 

need of major repairs; approximately 4,000 housing units were identified as substandard 

and in deteriorating or unsound conditions. While not identified by the LACFD, it is 

possible that the older housing stock within the City could pose a fire hazard threat, as 

some homes may not have fire alarms or other typical fire prevention devices that are 

commonly installed on newer homes. 

Further, while significant fire damage occurs infrequently, it is most likely to occur where 

industrial chemicals and fuels are used, stored, or transported. Industrial uses are generally 

in the northwestern portion of the City, clustered around West Florence Avenue. Such 

dangers, however, are minimized by the stringent enforcement of State requirements and 

of the City’s Fire Code, Building Code, and Zoning Code. 


Federal 

Uniform Fire Code 

The Uniform Fire Code contains regulations relating to construction and maintenance of 

buildings and the use of premises. Topics addressed in the Code include fire department 

access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion 

hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions intended to protect and 

assist fire responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized firesafety 

requirements for new and existing buildings and premises. The Code contains 

specialized technical regulations related to fire and life safety. 

State 

California Fire Code (Title 24, Part 9, California Code of Regulations) 

The California Fire Code is Part 9 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, also 

referred to as the California Building Standards Code. The California Fire Code 

incorporates the Uniform Fire Code with necessary California amendments. This Code 

prescribes regulations consistent with nationally recognized good practice for the 

safeguarding to a reasonable degree of life and property from the hazards of fire 

explosion, and dangerous conditions arising from the storage, handling and use of 

hazardous materials and devices, and from conditions hazardous to life or property in the 

use or occupancy of buildings or premises and provisions to assist emergency response 

personnel. 

6.4-2 


6.4 Fire Hazards 

California Health and Safety Code 

State fire regulations set forth in Section 13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety 

Code, include regulations for building standards (as also set forth in the California 

Building Code), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as 

extinguishers and smoke alarms, high-rise building and childcare facility standards, and 

fire suppression training. 

Local 


Chapter 6 (Fire Prevention) 

In 2000, the City adopted the Los Angeles Fire Code within the Inglewood Municipal 

Code Chapter 6. Article 1 of this Chapter identifies the adopted Los Angeles County Fire 

Code and associated amendments, while Article 2 of Chapter 6 pertains to the Hazardous 

Materials Inventory and Emergency Plan. 

• Issues 

• The older housing stock of the City could pose a fire hazard if upgraded fire 

prevention devices have not been installed. 


California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF), 2006. CDF 2005 Wildland 

Fire Summary, March. 

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF), 2006. 20 Largest 

California Wildland Fires (By Structures Destroyed and By Acreage Burned), 24 

February. 

City of Inglewood, 2004. Hazard Mitigation Plan. 


6.4-3

6.5 Hazardous Materials 

6.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 

This section provides information on hazardous materials and waste management 

associated with existing land uses within the City of Inglewood. Information for this 

section was obtained from the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD), City of 

Inglewood Municipal Code, and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 


Hazardous materials in the City are routinely used, stored, and transported in 

commercial/retail businesses as well as in educational facilities, hospitals, and households. 

A hazardous material is defined as any material that due to its quantity, concentration, 

physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to 

human health and safety or to the environment if released. Hazardous materials include, 

but are not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, and any material that a 

business or the local implementing agency has a reasonable basis for believing would be 

injurious to the health and safety of persons or harmful to the environment if released. 

Hazardous materials use and waste generators in the City include businesses, public and 

private institutions, and households. Federal, state, and local agency databases maintain 

comprehensive information on the locations of facilities using large quantities of 

hazardous materials, as well as facilities generating hazardous waste. Some of these 

facilities use certain classes of hazardous materials that require accidental release scenario 

modeling and risk management plans to protect surrounding land uses. 

Transportation of Hazardous Materials 

The transport of hazardous materials through the City of Inglewood is regulated by the 

state Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and California Highway Patrol (CHP). The 

Santa Monica (405) Freeway traverses through and provides direct access to the western 

portion of the City (in a north-south direction), and the Century (105) Freeway traverses 

through the southern portion of the City (in an east-west direction). Both of these 

freeways can be considered major routes where hazardous materials can be routinely 

transported. Additionally, the Cities busiest intersections on the west side of the City 102 

(e.g. Florence-La Cienega and Century-La Cienega) are major truck routes in the City 

where hazardous materials are routinely transported by trucks. 

In general, with the exception of high-level radioactive materials and certain poisons and 

explosives, all classes of hazardous materials can be transported on roadways in the City. 

However, because Section 31303 of the California Vehicle Code and U.S. Department of 

Transportation regulations require that hazardous materials be transported by routes with 

the least overall travel time, many of the local streets in the City are not used for the 

transport of hazardous materials. Although the City has little or no industry that uses 

102 Inglewood, City of. 1999, SEMS Multihazard Functional Plan, February. 


6.5-1


significant amounts of hazardous materials, materials are in transit through the City from 

other locations outside the City, and traverse the City en route to other destinations 

outside the City. 

Existing Hazardous Material Sites 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Information System (CERCLIS) 

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) 

was developed to protect the water, air, and land resources from the risks created by past 

chemical disposal practices. Under CERCLA, the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) maintains a list, known as CERCLIS, of all contaminated sites 

in the nation that have in the past or are currently undergoing clean-up activities. 

CERCLIS contains information on current hazardous waste sites, potential hazardous 

waste sites, and remedial activities. This includes sites that are on the National Priorities 

List (NPL) or being considered for the NPL (“Superfund”). No sites within the City are 

currently listed in the CERCLIS database. 103 

Cortese List 

The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese) List is a tool used by the state and 

local agencies and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act 

(CEQA) requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials 

release sites. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the California EPA to develop 

an updated Cortese List at least annually. Two sites within the City are currently listed 

under the Cortese List, and are further described below. 104 

Southern California Gas Company - Inglewood Manufactured Gas Plant 

Located at 700 Warren Lane, a 1.4 acre portion of the 55 acre Edward Vincent Park was 

used by the Gas Co. for the production of "manufactured gas" in the early 1900s. 

Currently the site is used as a city-owned recreational park. Manufactured gas was made at 

the site from coal and oil, and the byproducts from this operation included tars, oils, 

sludges, lampblack etc. Some byproduct residues such as, polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbons (PAH), could pose a hazardous material threat. In 1992 the California 

Department of Toxic Substances (DTSC) conducted a Preliminary Endangerment Report 

(PEA) and recommended remediation. The remediation was accomplished by the 

excavation of 5,824 tons of soil contaminated from former manufactured gas operations. 

Sampling verified the achievement of cleanup goals. Clean soil was imported, backfilled, 

compacted and resodded. 

103 U.S. EPA, Superfund Information Systems, CERCLIS Database, website: 

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/cursites/, accessed March 7, 2006. 

104 State of California, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control, 

Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese List), 

http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/database/Calsites/Cortese_List.cfm?county=19, accessed March 7, 2006. 

6.5-2 



Caprice Cleaners 

Located at 11236 Crenshaw Boulevard, the site is located in a strip mall and has operated 

as a dry cleaning facility for approximately 20 years. Phase I and II investigations 

confirmed soil contaminated by Perchloroethylene (PCE). The (DTSC) reviewed the 

Preliminary Endangerment Assessment report and concurs with the recommendation 

that "No Further Action" is warranted at the site on February 14, 1995 and the site is part 

of the Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP). 

DTSC Site Mitigation and Brownsfield Reuse Program (“CalSites”) Database 

The Site Mitigation and Brownsfield Reuse Program serves to cleanup and redevelop 

Brownfield sites for future use. Brownfields are properties that are contaminated, or 

thought to be contaminated, and are underutilized due to remediation costs and liability 

concerns. Often the remediation cost associated with a contaminated site serves as a 

major deterrent to any planned reuse of that site. 

The DTSC introduced the VCP to protect human health, cleanup the environment, and 

get property back to productive use. Participants in the VCP are able to restore properties 

quickly and efficiently, and eliminate competition for DTSC funding. Sites eligible for 

VCP are generally low-priority hazardous waste sites. The two Cortese sites identified 

above are also in the Site Mitigation and Brownsfield Reuse Program database as VCP 

Properties. 

Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Spills, Leaks, Investigations, 

and Cleanup (SLIC) List 

The SLIC Program was established by the State Water Resources Control Board 

(SWRCB) to allow each of its nine Regional Boards to oversee the cleanup of illegal 

discharges, contaminated properties, and other unregulated releases adversely impacting 

the state’s waters. Sites managed within the SLIC Program include sites polluted as a 

result of recent or historic spills, subsurface releases (e.g., pipelines, sumps), complaint 

investigations, and all other unauthorized discharges that pollute or threaten to pollute 

surface and/or ground waters. 

Nine sites within the City of Inglewood were identified in the SLIC List maintained by 

the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB). The SLIC Section 

of the LARWQCB oversees activities at non-underground storage tank (UST) sites where 

soil or groundwater contamination have occurred due to former industrial facilities and 

dry cleaners, where chlorinated solvents were spilled, or have leaked into the soil or 

groundwater. Table 6.5-1 identifies SLIC facilities and the associated substances that were 

released. 


6.5-3


Table 6.5-1 

Facilities on SLIC List for the City of Inglewood 

Site Name Address Substance Status 

1 Bodycote Hinderliter 9121 Aviation Blvd. 

Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC) 

Open 

2 Chrysler-Prince 1030 W Manchester Blvd. NA Closed 

3 Collins Estate Site 9007–9121 Aviation Blvd. VOC Open 

4 

Faithful Central Baptist 

Church 

321 Eucalyptus 

Polyethylene 

terephthalate (PET) 

Open 

5 Glasgow Property 315 Glasgow Ave. PET Open 

6 Owen's Cleaner 6501 West Blvd. VOC Closed 

7 Princeland Properties 1237 W Arbor Vitae St. NA Open 

8 Texaco Cypress Fee 

3000 90th St & Darby 

Park 

PET 

Open 

9 

Trinity Building—East 

Parking Lot 

301 West Florence Ave. PET Open 

SOURCE: LARWQCB LUFT List (http://geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov/search/) Accessed March 7, 2006 

“Open” status indicates that the site is still under investigation and/or cleanup. 

“Closed” status indicates that no additional investigation or cleanup is required at the site at this time, but does 

not mean that the contamination has been remediated. 

VOC’s are any organic compound which evaporates readily to the atmosphere. VOCs contribute significantly to 

photochemical smog production and certain health problems. 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) is a plastic resin of the polyester family that is used to make beverage, food 

and other liquid containers, as well as for some other thermoforming applications. 

Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFTs) 

The LARWQCB also maintains an Underground Storage Tank Program (UST Program) 

that deals specifically with leaking fuel tanks. While there may be other constituents of 

concern resulting from leaking fuel tanks, the primary substance of concern of this 

program is fuel. Most frequently, these fuel tank leaks are associated with common 

neighborhood gasoline service stations. According to the LARWQCB’s Leaking 

Underground Fuel Tank (LUFT) database, the City of Inglewood has 91 identified LUFT 

sites. These facilities on the LUFT List are shown in Table 6.5-2 in Appendix C. 

Figure 6.5-1 shows both SLIC and LUFT sites within the City of Inglewood. 

Oil Wells and Pipelines 

The City of Inglewood is located within the southern portion of a large oil field that 

includes Baldwin Hills to the Northwest. The oil deposits in this oil field have been 

reduced after nearly a century of oil extraction but there may be sufficient remaining oil 

and possibly untapped deposits, for continued extraction and even new exploratory 

drilling. 

6.5-4 




LOCATION OF LUFT SITES 

Legend 

LUFT Site 

Open Case 

Closed Case 


Water Body 

Metro Rail 

Railroad 

Source: Ca. Depart. of Fish & Game, January 2006. 

Date: May15, 2006 

Miles 


Figure 6.5-1


Within the City, there is only one remaining active oil well site, the seven-acre Brea Oil 

Company site at Eucalyptus Avenue and Hyde Park Boulevard. This site has multiple oil 

wells; however, any oil or gas extracted are not stored onsite, but are piped directly to 

refineries outside of the City. Previously, a small site operated in what is now the north 

parking lot at Hollywood Park. It was closed in 1997. 

Two major crude oil pipelines pass through western Inglewood, one 12-inch pipe and 

one 16-inch pipe. These pipelines transport crude oil through the City to refineries 

located outside of Inglewood. 

The primary hazards associated with oil wells and pipelines are fire and oil spills. 

Secondary hazards include the release of fumes into the air and the possible leaking of oil 

into the City’s storm drain system that could lead to contamination of beaches and the 

ocean. Due to the age and depletion of the Inglewood oil field, it is unlikely that there is 

sufficient pressure for a well to blow out if one is damaged. Also, as stated above oil 

extracted from these sites is not stored onsite. For these reasons, risks associated with fire 

or leaks are minimal, and any such risk would most likely be contained onsite. 

Potentially Contaminated Sites 

Potentially contaminated sites within Los Angeles County, which includes the City of 

Inglewood, may by caused by various types of land uses including landfills, manufacturing 

facilities, industrial facilities, and medical facilities. Although these facilities and 

operations generally use and store hazardous materials legally, incidents involving the 

accidental releases of these materials may occur due to their large concentration at these 

locations. 

Currently, the City of Inglewood does not operate any Class I landfills, which are used for 

the collection of hazardous wastes. The collection of household hazardous waste in the 

City is conducted by Los Angeles County, which conducts weekly household hazardous 

waste roundups throughout the County. Once or twice per year the household hazardous 

waste roundup is held in Inglewood, depending on the availability of a site. Household 

hazardous waste that are typically collected include: deodorizers, cleaners, bleach, floor 

wax, spot remover, drain cleaner, furniture polish, aerosol cans, latex paints, oil paints, 

weed killer, fertilizer, antifreeze, pesticides, pool chlorine, household and auto batteries, 

garden chemicals, motor oil, and propane tanks. Despite efforts by the County to collect 

these household hazardous wastes, there remains the risk of improper use or disposal of 

these materials by residents. Adverse environmental impacts can occur when household 

hazardous materials are disposed of in unlined sanitary landfills that are not meant for 

hazardous materials. These hazardous materials may leach through the soil and 

contaminate groundwater. 

Although incidents involving the inadvertent release of hazardous materials can happen 

anywhere, areas within the City that are subject to a higher risk of these incidents include 

locations near roadways that are frequently used for transporting hazardous materials 


6.5-7


such as the major arterials of La Cienega, Manchester and Century Boulevards, or along 

the 405 or 105 Freeways. 


A number of federal, state, and local laws and regulations have been enacted to regulate 

the management of hazardous materials. Implementation of these laws and the 

management of hazardous materials are regulated through programs administered by 

various agencies at the federal, state, and local levels. An overview of the key hazardous 

materials laws and regulations that apply to the City are provided below. 

Federal 

Several federal agencies regulate hazardous materials. These include the U.S. EPA, the 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Department of 

Transportation (DOT). Applicable federal regulations are contained primarily in Titles 10, 

29, 40, and 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). 

The U.S. DOT has developed regulations pertaining to the transport of hazardous 

materials and hazardous wastes by all modes of transportation. The U.S. Postal Service 

(USPS) has developed additional regulations for the transport of hazardous materials by 

mail. DOT regulations specify packaging requirements for different types of materials. 

EPA has also promulgated regulations for the transport of hazardous wastes. These more 

stringent requirements include tracking shipments with manifests to ensure that wastes 

are delivered to their intended destinations. 

State 

California Environmental Protection Agency 

The California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) has broad jurisdiction over 

hazardous materials management in the state. Within Cal/EPA, the DTSC has primary 

regulatory responsibility for hazardous waste management and cleanup. Enforcement of 

regulations has been delegated to local jurisdictions that enter into agreements with 

DTSC for the generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials under the 

authority of the Hazardous Waste Control Law. 

Along with the DTSC, the RWQCB is responsible for implementing regulations 

pertaining to management of soil and groundwater investigation and cleanup. RWQCB 

regulations are contained in Title 27 of the CCR. Additional state regulations applicable to 

hazardous materials are contained in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations 

(CCR). Title 26 of the CCR is a compilation of those sections or titles of the CCR that are 

applicable to hazardous materials. 

6.5-8 



Department of Toxic Substances Control 

The DTSC regulates hazardous waste in California primarily under the authority of the 

federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, and the California Health 

and Safety Code. Other laws that affect hazardous waste are specific to handling, storage, 

transportation, disposal, treatment, reduction, cleanup, and emergency planning. In 

addition, DTSC reviews and monitors legislation to ensure that the position reflects the 

DTSC’s goals. From these laws, DTSC’s major program areas develop regulations and 

consistent program policies and procedures. The regulations spell out what those who 

handle hazardous waste must do to comply with the laws. Under RCRA, DTSC has the 

authority to implement permitting, inspection, compliance, and corrective action 

programs to ensure that people who manage hazardous waste follow state and federal 

requirements. As such, the management of hazardous waste in the Policy Area would be 

under regulation by the DTSC to ensure that state and federal requirements pertaining to 

hazardous waste are complied with. 

California law provides the general framework for regulation of hazardous wastes by the 

Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL) passed in 1972. DTSC is the state’s lead agency 

in implementing the HWCL. The HWCL provides for state regulation of existing 

hazardous waste facilities, which include “any structure, other appurtenances, and 

improvements on the land, used for treatment, transfer, storage, resource recovery, 

disposal, or recycling of hazardous wastes,” and requires permits for, and inspections of, 

facilities involved in generation and/or treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous 

wastes. 

Although there are numerous state policies dealing with hazardous waste materials, the 

most comprehensive is the Tanner Act (AB 2948) that was adopted in 1986. The Tanner 

Act governs the preparation of hazardous waste management plans and the siting of 

hazardous waste facilities in the state of California. The act also mandates that each 

county adopt a Hazardous Waste Management Plan. To be in compliance with the Tanner 

Act, local or regional hazardous waste management plans need to include provisions that 

define (1) the planning process for waste management, (2) the permit process for new 

and expanded facilities, and (3) the appeal process to the state available for certain local 

decision. 

Hazardous Materials Management Plans 

In January 1996, Cal EPA adopted regulations implementing a “Unified Hazardous Waste 

and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program” (Unified Program). The six 

program elements of the Unified Program are hazardous waste generators and hazardous 

waste on-site treatment, underground storage tanks, above-ground storage tanks, 

hazardous material release response plans and inventories, risk management and 

prevention program, and Uniform Fire Code hazardous materials management plans and 

inventories. The program is implemented at the local level by a local agency—the 

Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). The CUPA is responsible for consolidating 

the administration of the six program elements within its jurisdiction. There are currently 


6.5-9


eight CUPAs that are certified to implement the Unified Program in Los Angeles County. 

The CUPA that has jurisdiction in the City of Inglewood is the LACFD. 

State and federal laws require detailed planning to ensure that hazardous materials are 

properly handled, used, stored, and disposed of, and, in the event that such materials are 

accidentally released, to prevent or to mitigate injury to health or the environment. 

California’s Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law, sometimes 

called the “Business Plan Act,” aims to minimize the potential for accidents involving 

hazardous materials and to facilitate an appropriate response to possible hazardous 

materials emergencies. The law requires businesses that use hazardous materials to 

provide inventories of those materials to designated emergency response agencies, to 

illustrate on a diagram where the materials are stored on site, to prepare an emergency 

response plan, and to train employees to use the materials safely. 

California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARP) 

The CalARP program (CCR Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 4.5) covers certain businesses 

that store or handle more than a certain volume of specific regulated substances at their 

facilities. The CalARP program regulations became effective on January 1, 1997, and 

include the provisions of the federal Accidental Release Prevention program (Title 40, 

CFR Part 68) with certain additions specific to the state pursuant to Article 2, 

Chapter 6.95, of the Health and Safety Code. 

The list of regulated substances is found in Article 8, Section 2770.5 of the CalARP 

program regulations. The businesses that use a regulated substance above the noted 

threshold quantity must implement an accidental release prevention program, and some 

may be required to complete a Risk Management Plan (RMP). An RMP is a detailed 

engineering analysis of the potential accident factors present at a business and the 

mitigation measures that can be implemented to reduce this accident potential. The 

purpose of a RMP is to decrease the risk of an off-site release of a regulated substance 

that might harm the surrounding environment and community. An RMP includes the 

following components: safety information, hazard review, operating procedures, training, 

maintenance, compliance audits, and incident investigation. The RMP must consider the 

proximity to sensitive populations located in schools, residential areas, general acute care 

hospitals, long-term health care facilities, and child day-care facilities, and must also 

consider external events such as seismic activity. 

Worker and Workplace Hazardous Materials Safety 

Occupational safety standards exist in federal and state laws to minimize worker safety 

risks from both physical and chemical hazards in the workplace. The California Division 

of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) is responsible for developing and 

enforcing workplace safety standards and assuring worker safety in the handling and use 

of hazardous materials. Among other requirements, Cal/OSHA obligates many 

businesses to prepare Injury and Illness Prevention Plans and Chemical Hygiene Plans. 

The Hazard Communication Standard requires that workers be informed of the hazards 

6.5-10 



associated with the materials they handle. For example, manufacturers are to 

appropriately label containers, Material Safety Data Sheets are to be available in the 

workplace, and employers are to properly train workers. 

Hazardous Materials Transportation 

The California Highway Patrol (CHP) and California Department of Transportation 

(Caltrans) are the enforcement agencies for hazardous materials transportation 

regulations. Transporters of hazardous materials and waste are responsible for complying 

with all applicable packaging, labeling, and shipping regulations. The Office of 

Emergency Services (OES) also provides emergency response services involving 

hazardous materials incidents. 

Investigation and Cleanup of Contaminated Sites 

The oversight of hazardous materials release sites often involves several different agencies 

that may have overlapping authority and jurisdiction. The DTSC and RWQCB are the 

two primary state agencies responsible for issues pertaining to hazardous materials release 

sites. Air quality issues related to remediation and construction at contaminated sites are 

also subject to federal and state laws and regulations that are administered at the local 

level. 

Investigation and remediation activities that would involve potential disturbance or 

release of hazardous materials must comply with applicable federal, state, and local 

hazardous materials laws and regulations. DTSC has developed standards for the 

investigation of sites where hazardous materials contamination has been identified or 

could exist based on current or past uses. The standards identify approaches to determine 

if a release of hazardous wastes/substances exists at a site and delineates the general 

extent of contamination; estimates the potential threat to public health and/or the 

environment from the release and provides an indicator of relative risk; determines if an 

expedited response action is require to reduce an existing or potential threat; and 

completes preliminary project scoping activities to determine data gaps and identifies 

possible remedial action strategies to form the basis for development of a site strategy. 

Siting of Schools 

The California Education Code (Section 17210 et seq.) outlines the requirements of siting 

school facilities near or on known or suspected hazardous materials sites, or near facilities 

that emit hazardous air emissions, handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, 

substances, or waste. The code requires that, prior to commencing the acquisition of 

property for a new school site, an environmental site investigation be completed to 

determine the health and safety risks (if any) associated with a site. Recent legislation and 

changes to the Education Code identify DTSC’s role in the assessment, investigation, and 

cleanup of proposed school sites. All proposed school sites that will receive state funding 

for acquisition and/or construction must go through a comprehensive investigation and 

cleanup process under DTSC oversight. DTSC is required to be involved in the 


6.5-11


environmental review process to ensure that selected properties are free of 

contamination, or if the property is contaminated, that it is cleaned up to a level that is 

protective of students and faculty who will occupy the new school. All proposed school 

sites must be suitable for residential land use, which is DTSC’s most protective standard 

for children. 

Local 

Los Angeles County Fire Department 

As the Los Angeles County CUPA, the LACFD has jurisdiction in all unincorporated and 

most incorporated areas in the county, including the City of Inglewood. Serving as the 

CUPA, LACFD’s Health Hazardous Material Division (HHMD) directly administers 

programs related to waste generation, hazardous materials inventories, and risk 

management. The HHMD’s mission is to protect the public health and the environment 

throughout Los Angeles County from accidental releases and improper handling, storage, 

transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes through coordinated 

efforts of inspections, emergency response, enforcement, and site mitigation oversight. 

The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works is a participating agency under the 

LACFD CUPA and implements the underground storage tank program. 

• Issues 

• With major freeways and truck routes that traverse the City, hazardous materials 

are routinely transported through the City. 


California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control, 

Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese List), 

http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/database/Calsites/Cortese_List.cfm?county=19, accessed 

March 7, 2006. 

Inglewood, City of. 1999, SEMS Multihazard Functional Plan, February. 

U.S. EPA, Superfund Information Systems, CERCLIS Database, website: 

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/cursites/, accessed March 7, 2006. 

6.5-12 


6.6 Police Services 

6.6 POLICE SERVICES 

This section identifies the police protection service providers in the City, and describes 

the staffing levels, equipment, staffing standards, number of and types of calls received, 

and crime prevention programs available. Information for this section is based on written 

information provided by the Inglewood Police Department and the City’s website. 


Law enforcement services in the City are provided by the Inglewood Police Department 

(IPD). The IPD operates one police station which houses most of the Department’s 

offices, located adjacent to Inglewood City Hall at 1 Manchester Boulevard. The location 

of the IPD is shown in Figure 6.6-1. The Office of the Chief of Police, the Patrol Bureau, 

the Detective Bureau, the Records Division, the Custody Division, and the pistol range 

are all located at the police station. The Communications Division is located in the 

basement of the station known as the Emergency Operations Center (EOC). The offices 

for the Traffic Division, the Training Section, and the Personnel Section are located on 

the 2 nd floor of the City Hall Building, also at 1 Manchester Boulevard. 

The IPD is currently authorized for a staff of 210 sworn officers and 67 non-sworn 

positions, not including part-time positions, as shown in Table 6.6-1 below. As of April, 

2006, the IPD had 197 actual sworn officers and approximately 61 civilian personnel, 

which means that they have 13 sworn and 6 civilian vacancies. 

With a 2005 population estimate at 118,164, the City currently has a ratio of 

approximately 1 officer per 1,000 residents; however, the City does not utilize a standard 

personnel-to-population ratio to determine department needs. Additions to the Police 

Department are determined more based on the number of calls the Department handles 

per year, and at the recommendation of department heads on an as-needed basis. 105 

The Police Department is comprised of three major Bureaus: The Administrative Services 

Bureau, Detective Bureau, and Patrol Bureau. These bureaus are further discussed below. 

Administrative Services Bureau 

This Bureau is the support branch of the City’s Police Department and is tasked with 

hiring the Department’s staff and ensuring they are trained, accurately paid, properly 

equipped and supported. Divisions within this Bureau include Police Communications, 

Custody, Personnel/Training along with the Property Unit, Fiscal Management Unit, and 

the Grants Administration Unit. 

105 Gruen Associates, 2003. Final Environmental Impact Report. Renaissance. November 26. 


6.6-1


Table 6.6-1 Inglewood Police Department, Staffing Levels, 2006 

Sworn Positions 

Chief of Police 1 

Captain 3 

Lieutenant 9 

Sergeant 31 

Detective 41 

Police Officer 

(125, 13 vacant) 

Total 210 

Non-Sworn Positions 

Account Clerk—Senior 1 

Administrative Aide 4 

Administrative Analyst 1 

Administrative Secretary 2 

Communications Manager 1 

Community Affairs Program Specialist 

(1 vacant) 

Community Affairs Program Specialist—Senior 1 

Crime Analyst—Senior 1 

Custody Officer 10 

Customer Service Representative 1 

Desk Officer 2 

Fiscal Services Coordinator 1 

Forensic Specialist 1 

Forensic Specialist—Senior 2 

Forensic Supervisor 1 

Jail Manager 1 

Jail Supervisor 2 

Property Officer 2 

Property Room Supervisor 1 

Public Safety Dispatcher 

(14, 2 vacant) 

Public Safety Dispatcher—Supervising 6 

Records Assistant 

(6, 3 vacant) 

Records Manager 1 

Records Supervisor 1 

Special Enforcement Officer 2 

Typist Clerk—Senior 1 

Total 67 

SOURCE: City of Inglewood, Police Department. 2006 

6.6-2 




POLICE SERVICES 



Miles 


Figure 6.6-1


The Communications, Records and Custody Divisions provide front line support. 

Working 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, these divisions assist the department, dispatching 

emergency calls, operating the Jail and managing all of the associated reports and records 

required to move cases, paperwork and people through the Criminal Justice System. The 

Police Department maintains a detention facility for adult arrestees. Prisoners are held 

until they go to court or until they are bailed out from this department. 

The Property Unit stores, catalogs and manages more than 50,000 evidence items 

collected by the Department’s officers and detectives annually. The unit manages seized 

evidence until such time that it is transferred to the court or ordered destroyed. 

The Fiscal Management Unit handles the Department’s Payroll, Purchasing and 

Accounts Payable Sections. This unit ensures that employees are paid biweekly, purchases 

all equipment and services, and pays the vendors that keep the department operating. It is 

also responsible for development of the annual budget. 

The Personnel/Training Division is divided into two functions. The Human Resources 

Unit is responsible for recruiting, pre-employment investigations and hiring of all police 

employee’s. The unit also manages the personnel files of all Police Department 

employees. 

The Training Unit is responsible for the coordination and management of training to 

the department’s entire staff from entry-level recruits to the executive level of the 

department. The unit ensures that the department meets or exceeds the level of training 

mandated the California’s Commission on Police Standards and Training (P.O.S.T.). 

Detective Bureau 

This Bureau is traditionally responsible for the investigation and filing of criminal 

complaints. Normally, a crime or arrest report is taken by patrol officers and, depending 

on the nature of the crime and whether there are any leads, the report is assigned to a 

case investigator. The investigator conducts additional follow-up inquiries and determines 

if the crime is prosecutable. The ultimate goal is to solve the crime by arresting the 

perpetrator and seeing that he or she is prosecuted. The Detective Bureau also handles 

missing persons, child abuse and neglect referrals, the monitoring of state-mandated sex 

crime registrants, gang and other criminal intelligence issues, and the special issues 

surrounding juvenile crime and status offenses. 106 

Patrol Bureau 

This Bureau is comprised of the Department’s uniformed police divisions and is 

considered the foundation of the Department’s crime fighting and public safety efforts in 

106 City of Inglewood website. www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/police/detective/default.asp. Accessed 

March 23, 2006. 


6.6-5


the City. These divisions include Patrol, Traffic, K-9 unit, Anti-Crime Team, and the 

Transit Safety Team. The Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) and Crisis Negotiation 

Teams are also functions managed within the Patrol Bureau. 

The Patrol Division is primarily responsible for answering calls for service and 

conducting proactive enforcement, with an emphasis on community policing and 

problem-solving approaches. Inglewood has the same contemporary crime problems 

facing other large cities and congested urban areas. The City’s close proximity to the Los 

Angeles International Airport brings a significant number of visitors and travelers 

through the city each day. 107 Each patrol officer works four 10-hour shifts per week. Shift 

times overlap to ensure adequate patrol of the City. Shifts last from 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., 

from 3:00 P.M. to 1:00 A.M. and from 10:00 P.M. to 8:00 A.M. 108 

The Traffic Division is primarily responsible for the safety of Inglewood’s streets and 

thoroughfares and for ensuring the smooth flow of traffic. In addition, the Traffic 

Division conducts regular checkpoints for violators of the state’s Driver License and 

Driving Under the Influence (DUI) laws. Since 2001, the Inglewood Police Department 

has received a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety that has covered most of 

the costs related to such checkpoints. Finally, the Traffic Division is responsible for 

coordinating the city’s red light camera enforcement program. 

The Department’s K-9 Unit consists of three K-9 handlers. The Inglewood Police 

Department uses German Shepherds for its K-9 program. 

The Anti-Crime Team (ACT) consists of one lieutenant, two sergeants, and 17 police 

officers. The unit is primarily responsible for street gang enforcement, street narcotics 

enforcement and prostitution enforcement. In order to carry out its mission effectively, 

the unit regularly conducts parole and probation searches, “John” Stings and reverse-buy 

narcotics operations, as well as conducting undercover surveillances of criminal targets. 

Many of the Department’s SWAT members are assigned to the ACT unit. 

The Patrol Bureau is also responsible for parking enforcement activities including special 

enforcement, traffic control, and the school crossing guard program. 

Response Times 

The IPD does not set a minimum service ratio. Additions to the Police Department are 

made at the recommendation of department heads on an as-needed basis. The average 

emergency response times, however, for the period of January 1, 2005 through 

December 1, 2005 are as follows: For morning watch, 6 minutes 28 seconds; day watch, 

7 minutes and 29 seconds; and evening watch, 6 minutes and 48 seconds. The average 

non-emergency response time is as follows: For morning watch, 8 minutes and 

107 City of Inglewood website. www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/police/patrol/default.asp. Accessed March 

23, 2006. 

6.6-6 



26 seconds; day watch, 10 minutes and 1 second; and evening watch, 9 minutes and 

58 seconds. These response times are considered acceptable for the Police Department. 109 

Mutual Aid Agreements 

The IPD participates in the California Law Enforcement Master Mutual Aid Plan. The 

City of Inglewood and its Police Department are in “Area G” of the State’s Region 1. 

Coordinated response to state and local emergency is accomplished through the Law 

Enforcement Incident Command System, the Master Mutual Aid Plan, and the 

Standardized Emergency Management System. 110 

Crime Statistics 

The IPD distributes a variety of crime information and statistics to residents in order to 

increase awareness and, ultimately, reduce crime in the city. Table 6.6-2 represents crime 

statistics in seven major offense categories (FBI Part I) for the calendar years 1999-2005. 

Part I crimes include murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, theft, and auto 

theft. 

During the calendar year 2005, there were 4,258 reported crimes, a 14 percent increase in 

major crimes compared to the calendar year 2004, which reported 3,746 crimes. The most 

frequently reported crimes were property crimes, which include burglary, larceny, and 

auto theft. Incidents of homicide increased from 1999 to 2001 by 95 percent, but have 

continued to drop almost steadily to 2005, with the exception of a 10 percent increase in 

incidents between 2002 and 2003. Incidents of rape over the years have gone up and 

down, as have incidents of robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, and auto theft. Larceny 

saw a decline in incidents of 26 percent from 2001 to 2004, but increased again 

27 percent from 2004 to 2005. 

Table 6.6-2 City of Inglewood, Crime Summary, 1999–2005 

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

CHANGE 

2004-2005 

Homicide 20 24 39 29 32 27 25 -7% 

Rape 39 52 36 61 56 43 47 9% 

Robbery 600 575 639 504 581 459 556 21% 

Aggravated Assault 695 726 641 329 422 390 434 11% 

Burglary 691 803 839 690 801 760 821 8% 

Larceny (Theft) 1,411 1,544 1,550 1,522 1,240 1,147 1,452 27% 

Auto Theft 925 914 874 970 1,230 920 923 0% 

Total 4,378 4,638 4,618 4,103 4,362 3,746 4,258 14% 

SOURCE: City of Inglewood, Police Department, 2006 

108 Gruen Associates, 2003. Final Environmental Impact Report Renaissance. November 26. 

109 Lieutenant Mark Sissac, Inglewood Police Department, 2006. Personal communication. March 29. 



6.6-7


Crime Prevention Programs 

The following special programs have been established by the IPD in order to reduce the 

occurrence of crime and to increase the apprehension of criminals: 111 

• Canine Unit: Inglewood’s canine unit is comprised of three general K-9 Teams. 

Canines are used to locate and arrest violent offenders, to search buildings and 

vehicles, and to detect narcotics. 

• Transit Safety Team: This 10-Office unit, supported by transit funds, is charged with 

law enforcement affecting public transportation and transportation corridors. 

• Anti-Crime Team (A.C.T.): This 20-Officer special enforcement field unit was 

established in 1989. This unit continues to be funded through a special assessment 

district, which was passed with 79 percent voter approval. The A.C.T. provides 

enhanced enforcement aimed at reducing drugs and gang violence. The A.C.T. 

includes a four-Officer bicycle team. 

• Inglewood Community Affairs Section: Established with one of the first recent federal 

grants to local law enforcement, this 5-person division identifies and develops 

strategies to deal with community problems. Each of the City’s four “beats” is 

assigned a Senior Lead Officer and an Assistant Lead Officer, who staff 

Neighborhood Public Safety Centers in each quadrant. These community centers 

are currently operating in three of the four police beats, identified in Figure 6.6-1. 

• Neighborhood Watch: Citizens in over 200 Neighborhood Watch Block Clubs 

throughout the City exist to join the police department in taking active steps 

toward crime prevention and apprehension of criminals. 

• Commercial Security Program: This business equivalent to the Neighborhood Watch 

concentrates on crime prevention in businesses. 

The City of Inglewood also participates in an international program designed to reduce 

the occurrence of crime. The CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental 

Design) promotes the development of design features that discourage crime, while 

encouraging legitimate use of the environment. The CPTED operates under the basic 

premise that the physical environment can be changed or managed to produce behavioral 

effects that can reduce the incidence and fear of crime, thereby improving the quality of 

life, and enhancing the profitability for business. Examples of CPTED security 

techniques encouraged for by the City of Inglewood include: 112 

• Territoriality—the provision of physical features into new developments, including 

fences, lighting, signs, maintenance, and landscaping, which define the space and 

work to identify intruders. 

• Natural Surveillance—the placement of physical features, activities, lighting, and 

people in locations that maximize the opportunities for observations and 

surveillance. 

• Access Control—the placement of property location entrances, exits, fencing, 

landscaping, and lighting that direct both foot and vehicle traffic ways that 

discourage crime. 



6.6-8 



Future Demands 

At present, no information regarding expanding the Police Station has been disclosed. 

However, with the constant change in technology, new equipment and additional staff 

will be needed to ensure that the Department is equipped to operate in the future. For 

example, the new State DNA law requires that offenders are administered an oral swab 

(buccal specimen) to secure a DNA specimen. To administer oral swabs and process 

DNA specimens, the Department needs additional storage space and personnel. 

Projected future needs include updated computers, vehicles, video equipment, weapons, 

and additional sworn and civilian staff. 113 Currently the Department has 13 vacant 

positions to fill for police officer, which it plans on filling as qualified officers apply. The 

Department also plans on purchasing 11 new police cars, which are budgeted for next 

year, however many would be replacing aged vehicles. The Department has a number of 

cars with over 100 thousand miles, which should have been replaced between 30 and 60 

thousand miles. 

• Issues 

• The existing Police Department is insufficient to accommodate the staffing and 

equipment that it currently has and needs. The Department has been using City 

Hall to house some of its divisions. 

• The Department has a number of cars with over 100 thousand miles, which should 

have been replaced between 30 and 60 thousand miles. While the Department has 

plans to purchase 11 new police cars, many would be replacements of aged vehicles 

as opposed to increasing the supply of police cars. 

• The Inglewood Police Department does not set a minimum service ratio. As new 

development occurs and the City’s population increases, adequate office response 

times should be ensured in order to respond sufficiently to emergency calls. 

• The need for adequate and steady funding for new officers, facilities and equipment 

remains an ongoing issue. 


Gruen Associates, 2003. Final Environmental Impact Report Renaissance. November 26. 

Inglewood, City of. 2006. Website: www.cityofinglewood, April. 

Sissac, Lieutenant Martin J., ASB Adjutant, Inglewood Police Department, 2006. Personal 

communication, March 29. 

113 Lieutenant Martin J. Sissac, Inglewood Police Department, 2006. Personal communication, March 29. 


6.6-9

6.7 Fire Services 

6.7 FIRE SERVICES 

This section provides information on existing fire and emergency services within the City. 

In addition, current staffing, equipment, response times, and standards of these services 

are described. It is important to note that and urban fire hazards are discussed in 

Section 6.4 (Fire Hazards) of this Technical Background Report. Information for this 

section was obtained from personal communication with the Los Angeles County Fire 

Department and information provided on the Los Angeles County Fire Department 

website. 


The City of Inglewood receives fire protection and paramedic services from the County 

of Los Angeles Consolidated Fire Protection District, also known as the Los Angeles 

County Fire Department (LACFD). The LACFD assumed fire protection and paramedic 

responsibility from the City of Inglewood Fire Department on November 1 st , 2000. The 

LACFD currently provides the same emergency services previously provided by the 

Inglewood Fire Department. 114 Services include fire suppression, hazardous materials 

protection, emergency medical treatment including basic and advanced life support 

transportation, earthquake and fire safety planning, fire inspections and building plan 

reviews. 115 

Fire Stations, Equipment, and Staffing 

The City of Inglewood belongs to Battalion 20 within Division 6 of the County of Los 

Angeles Consolidated Fire Protection District. Battalion 20 operates a total of six 

stations, five of these serve the City of Inglewood. Of these stations, four are located 

within the City of Inglewood, as shown in Table 6.7-1, and one is located within the 

unincorporated County territory of Lennox. The locations of each of the fire stations in 

the City are identified in Figure 6.7-1. Table 6.7-1 provides information on each fire 

station that serves the City, including location, amount and type of equipment, and 

staffing levels. 116 

As of March 2006, Battalion 20 employed approximately 75 full-time staff among the five 

different fire stations that serve the City. The five stations are manned in three rotating 

shifts (A, B, or C). A three-platoon schedule is based on 24-hour shifts that start at 

8:00 A.M. Rotation is every other day for three days, and then two days off, and again 

every other day for three days with four days off at the end. There are a total of ten shifts 

per month. 117 



116 Bennett, Mark J., Acting Assistant Fire Chief, 2006. Personal communication.March 14. 



6.7-1


Table 6.7-1 

Inglewood Fire Stations 

Station No. Location Equipment Staffing 

Station 

170 

Station 

171 

Station 

172 

Station 

173 

Station 

18 

10701 S. Crenshaw 

Boulevard 

141 W. Regent 

Street 

810 Centinela 

Avenue 

9001 S. Crenshaw 

Boulevard 

4518 W. Lennox 

Boulevard 

(unincorporated 

territory) 

Assessment light force: 4- 

person truck company 

2-person engine responding as 

a unit 

3-person engine company 

2-person paramedic squad 





4-person paramedic engine 

company 

SOURCE: Mark J. Bennett, Acting Assistant Fire Chief, March 14, 2006. 

Truck: captain, firefighter 

specialist, two firefighters; 

engine: firefighter specialist, 

and one 

firefighter/paramedic 

Captain, firefighter specialist, 

firefighter, 2 paramedics, 

Battalion Chief, Deputy fire 

chief 


firefighter, 2 paramedics 


firefighter, 2 paramedics 

Captain, a firefighter 

specialist, 2 

firefighters/paramedics 

Standard company staffing is generally as follows: a minimum of 25 personnel per shift in 

suppression. An Assistant Deputy Chief oversees each of the three divisions. The office 

of the Assistant Deputy Chief that oversees Division 6 is located in Huntington Park. 118 

As depicted in Table 6.7-1 above, staffing on each unit is as follows: 

• A 3-person company consists of a captain, a firefighter specialist, and a firefighter. 

• A 4-person company is staffed with a captain, a firefighter specialist, and two 

firefighters. On a paramedic engine company, the two firefighters are also 

paramedics 

• A light force (defined as two apparatus assigned together under one captain) 

contains two units (a truck and an engine) that respond in tandem. The truck is 

staffed with a captain, a firefighter specialist and two firefighters, and the engine on 

the light force is staffed with a firefighter specialist and one firefighter. Since Light 

Force 170 is an assessment unit, one of the firefighters is also a paramedic. 

• A paramedic squad has 2 firefighter paramedics. 


6.7-2 




FIRE STATIONS 

Legend 


Fire Station 

Water Body 

Metro Rail 

Railroad 




Miles 

0 0.25 0.5 

Figure 6.7-1

6.7 Fire Services 

Fire and Medical Incidents 

In 2005, the five stations serving Inglewood responded to 10,505 emergency incidents, of 

which 8,299 (79 percent) were medical emergency responses. Divided equally, this 

equates to approximately 1,660 responses per station, which is well within the number of 

calls recommended by the Insurance Service Office (ISO) when rating a community for 

fire insurance rates. 119 The ISO provides rating and statistical information for the 

insurance industry in the United States. Specifically, the ISO recommends that a second 

company be put in service in a fire station if that station receives more than 2,500 calls 

per year. The purpose of the ISO’s recommendation is to assure reliability of response 

time to a structure fire. 

Due to the size of the LACFD, the Battalion that serves Inglewood can easily draw from 

the depth of resources available around the County, including within its own division that 

has additional stations in adjacent unincorporated areas and within the neighboring cities 

of Hawthorne and Gardena. According to the LACFD, Fire Station 18, which is within 

Battalion 20 but outside City limits, would be the closest unit available to service 

Inglewood if a need should arise. 120 

Fires in Inglewood represent a small portion of all calls in Inglewood. The Division 

reports that no particular area of the City experiences an unusual number of fires and no 

particular factor is responsible for causing the fires. High-rise developments, however, 

have the potential to cause more difficulty in fighting fire due to the need to provide 

more resources. Other calls to the Division include miscellaneous problems such as 

hazardous materials incident or a water rescue. 121 

Response Times and Protocol 

The existing service level in Inglewood is adequate for the existing conditions. The 

LACFD uses nationally-accepted guidelines for response times in urban areas: 5 minutes 

for a first-responding or basic life support unit (usually an engine company) and 

8 minutes for an advanced life support (paramedic) unit. Inglewood had 10,505 

emergency incidents in 2005, of which 79 percent were medical. The average emergency 

response time was 4 minutes 22 seconds. There were additionally 440 non-emergency 

incidents with an average response time of 6 minutes 21 seconds. 122 


In addition to providing service within the City of Inglewood, the LACFD also 

participates in automatic and mutual aid services with neighboring jurisdictions. Units 

from stations located outside Inglewood respond to calls on a daily basis. Under the 






6.7-5


LACFD service concept, emergency units are dispatched as needed to an incident 

anywhere in the LACFD’s service territory based on the distance and availability, without 

regard to municipal boundaries. The LACFD has ten fire stations within three miles of 

the Inglewood city limits. These fire stations are located within the cities of Hawthorne, 

Gardena, and Lawndale and within the unincorporated communities of West Athens, 

Lennox and Baldwin Hills. 123 

Therefore, there are ample resources available to respond to a large incident or multiple 

simultaneous incidents in Inglewood without the need to request mutual aid from other 

fire protection agencies. 124 The ability to manage and control major fires or other 

emergencies is enhanced by the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). 

Further information on SEMS is provided in Section 6.8 (Emergency Preparedness) of 

this TBR. 

Projected Needs 

Currently, there are no plans to expand services in the city of Inglewood. The LACFD 

does not maintain population or growth projections. Inglewood contracts with the 

County of Los Angeles for fire protection services on a fee-for-service basis. As such, any 

changes in Fire Department staffing, equipment, or facilities would be implemented as a 

result of periodic contract negotiations between the City and the LACFD. 125 


Several federal, state, and local ordinances and programs affect fire protection in 

Inglewood. These are listed under the Regulatory Context of Section 6.4 (Fire Hazards) 

of this Technical Background Report. 

• Issues 

• No issues have been identified related to fire services. 


Bennett, Mark J. Acting Assistant Fire Chief, Division VI, Los Angeles County Fire 

Department, 2006. Personal communication, March 16. 

Gruen Associates, 2003. Final Environmental Impact Report Renaissance. November 26. 




6.7-6 


6.8 Emergency Preparedness 

6.8 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 

This section provides information on the existing emergency response services in the City 

of Inglewood that are provided by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. 

Information provided within this section was obtained from the City’s 1999 Multi-Hazard 

Function Plan (Emergency Plan) and the 2004 City of Inglewood Hazard Mitigation Plan. 


The Emergency Plan addresses the City’s planned response to extraordinary emergency 

situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, and nuclear defense 

operations. The operational concepts reflected in the Emergency Plan focus on potential 

large-scale disasters which can generate unique situations requiring unusual emergency 

responses. Such disasters pose major threats to life and property and can impact the wellbeing 

of large numbers of people. The Emergency Plan is considered a preparedness 

document, and is designed to include the City as a part of a statewide emergency response 

organization and also to conform to the California Standardized Emergency Management 

System (SEMS). 

The Hazard Mitigation Plan is intended to augment the City’s Emergency Operations 

Plan and Procedures, and is to be considered when updating or revising other City policy 

documents including, but not limited to, the General Plan, and all of its required 

Elements. The purpose of the Hazard Mitigation Plan is to provide direction and 

guidance to City departments and the public concerning mitigation measures to lessen the 

risk of various hazards that threaten the City of Inglewood. 

City of Inglewood Multi-Functional Hazard Plan 

The Basic Plan (of the Emergency Plan) addresses the City’s planned response to 

emergencies associated with natural disasters and technological incidents—including both 

peacetime and wartime nuclear defense operations. It provides an overview of operational 

concepts, identifies components of the City’s emergency management organization within 

the SEMS, and describes the overall responsibilities of the federal, state, and county 

entities and the City for protecting life and property, and assuring the overall well-being 

of the population. The Hazard Identification and Analysis section of the Emergency Plan 

identifies hazards that could occur within the City including: major earthquakes, 

hazardous materials, flooding, dam failure, transportation incidents, train derailment, 

trucking incident, and Metroline incidents. 

Operations during peacetime and national security emergencies involve a full spectrum of 

activities from a minor incident, to a major earthquake, to a nuclear detonation. There are 

a number of similarities in operational concepts for peacetime and national security 

emergencies. Some emergencies will be preceded by a build-up or warning period, 

providing sufficient time to warn the population and implement mitigation measures 

designed to reduce loss of life and property damage. Other emergencies occur with little 


6.8-1


or no advance warning, thus requiring immediate activation of the emergency operations 

plan and commitment of resources. All agencies must be prepared to respond promptly 

and effectively to any foreseeable emergency, including the provision and utilization of 

mutual aid. 

Emergency management activities during peacetime and national security emergencies are 

often associated with the four emergency management phases identified below. However, 

not every disaster necessarily includes all indicated phases. 

Preparedness Phase 

The preparedness phase involves activities taken in advance of an emergency. These 

activities develop operational capabilities and effective responses to a disaster. These 

actions might include mitigation activities, emergency/disaster planning, training and 

exercises, and public education. Agencies that have either a primary or support mission 

relative to response and recovery should prepare Standard Operating Procedures 

(SOPs)/Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs) and checklists detailing personnel 

assignments, policies, notification rosters, and resource lists. Increased readiness during 

this phase could include the following actions: review and update of emergency plans; 

dissemination of accurate and timely emergency public information; accelerated training; 

recruitment; mobilization of resources; and testing warning and communication systems. 

Response Phase 

The response phase is divided into two phases, as follows: 

Pre-Emergency 

When a disaster is inevitable, actions are precautionary and emphasize protection of life. 

Typical responses might include the following: 

• Evacuation of threatened populations to safe areas. 

• Advising threatened populations of the emergency and apprising them of safety 

measures to be implemented. 

• Advising the Los Angeles County Operational Area of the emergency. 

• Identifying the need for mutual aid and requesting such through the Los Angeles 

County Operational Area via the Lennox Sheriff’s Station. 

• Proclamation of a Local Emergency by local authorities. 

Emergency Response 

During the Emergency Response phase, emphasis is placed on saving lives and property, 

control of the situation and minimizing effects of the disaster. Immediate response is 

accomplished within the affected area by local government agencies and segments of the 

private sector. 

6.8-2 



When local resources are committed to the maximum and additional resources are 

required, requests for mutual aid will be initiated through the Los Angeles County 

Operational Area. Fire and law enforcement agencies will request or render mutual aid 

directly through established channels. If required, State Office of Emergency Services 

(OES) may coordinate the establishment of one or more Disaster Support Areas (DSAs) 

where resources and supplies can be received, stockpiled, allocated, and dispatched to 

support operations in the affected area(s). 

Depending on the severity of the emergency, a Local Emergency may be proclaimed, the 

local Emergency Operating Center (EOC) may be activated, and Los Angeles County 

Operational Area will be advised. The State OES Director may request a gubernatorial 

proclamation of a State of Emergency, where state agencies would then respond to 

requests for assistance. 

Recovery Phase 

As soon as possible, the State OES Director will bring together representatives of federal, 

state, county, and city agencies, as well as representatives of the American Red Cross, to 

coordinate the implementation of assistance programs and establishment of support 

priorities. Disaster Application Centers (DACs) may also be established, providing a 

“one-stop” service to initiate the process of receiving federal, state, and local recovery 

assistance. The recovery period has major objectives, which may overlap, including the 

following: 

• Reinstatement of family autonomy 

• Provision of essential public services 

• Permanent restoration of private and public property 

• Identification of residual hazards 

• Plans to mitigate future hazards 

• Recovery of costs associated with response and recovery efforts 

Mitigation Phase 

Mitigation efforts occur both before and following disaster events. Post-disaster 

mitigation is part of the recovery process. Eliminating or reducing the impact of hazards 

which exist within the City and are a threat to life and property are part of the mitigation 

efforts. Mitigation tools include: 

• Local ordinances and statutes (zoning ordinance, building codes and enforcement, 

etc.) 

• Structural measures 

• Tax levee or abatements 

• Public information and community relations 

• Land use planning 

• Professional training 


6.8-3


Peacetime Emergencies 

The City’s partial or total response to natural disasters or technological incidents will be 

dictated by the type and magnitude of the emergency. Generally, response to a major 

peacetime emergency situation will progress from local, to county, to state, to federal 

involvement. 

For planning purposes, State OES has established three levels of emergency response to 

peacetime emergencies, which are based on the severity of the situation and the 

availability of local resources. 

Level One—Decentralized Coordination and Direction 

This phase includes a minor to moderate incident wherein local resources are adequate 

and available. A Local Emergency may or may not be proclaimed, and the City EOC may 

or may not be activated. Off-duty personnel may be recalled. 

Level Two—Centralized Coordination and Decentralized Direction 

This phase includes a moderate to severe emergency wherein local resources are not 

adequate and mutual aid may be required on a regional or even statewide basis. Key 

management level personnel from the principal involved agencies will co-locate in a 

central location to provide jurisdictional or multi-jurisdictional coordination. The EOC 

should be activated, and off-duty personnel may be recalled. A Local Emergency will be 

proclaimed and a State of Emergency may be proclaimed. 

Level Three—Centralized Coordination and Direction 

This phase include a major local or regional disaster wherein resources in or near the 

impacted area are overwhelmed and extensive state and/or federal resources are required. 

A Local Emergency and a State of Emergency will be proclaimed and a Presidential 

Declaration of an Emergency or Major Disaster will be requested. All response and early 

recovery activities will be directed from the EOC, and all off-duty personnel will be 

recalled. 

Standardized Emergency Management System 

The SEMS is a procedure for integrating emergency response functions. It sets forth a 

system and framework within which response agencies that utilize the SEMS can function 

in an integrated fashion, in effect becoming a single response entity. The SEMS outlines a 

chain of authority (command) for organization of all public emergency response 

functions within the State. 

The SEMS has been adopted by the City of Inglewood for managing response to multiagency 

and multi-jurisdiction emergencies and to facilitate communications and 

coordination between all levels of the system and among all responding agencies. When 

fully activated, the SEMS consists of five organizational levels, which are activated as 

6.8-4 



necessary: field response, local government, operational areas (countywide), OES Mutual 

Aid Regions, and State OES. 

As its name implies, the SEMS provides guidelines for standardization of procedures and 

approaches to emergency response; facilitation of the flow of information and resources 

between organizational levels (field, local government, operation area, regional and state); 

coordination between responding agencies; and rapid mobilization, deployment, use and 

tracking of resources. Cities and counties are encouraged to utilize the SEMS in order to 

qualify for State funds for emergency response activities. 

City of Inglewood Hazard Mitigation Plan 

This section highlights the coordination of resources necessary to address potential 

emergency hazards in the City. 

Emergency Operations Organization 

In the late 1970s, the City established the Inglewood Civil Defense and Disaster Council, 

which has oversight of the City Emergency Operations Organization (EOO) through the 

Emergency Operations Board (EOB), as discussed in detail below. The EOO is 

responsible for oversight, approval, and implementation of the City’s Local Hazard 

Mitigation Plan. 

The EOO is comprised of all agencies of the City government. However, unlike 

traditional departments, the EOO is not located physically in any one place. Rather, it is a 

chain of command and protocols that integrate the City’s emergency operations into a 

single operation. It centralizes command and information coordination so as to enable 

the chain of command to operate efficiently and effectively in deploying resources. 

The EOB supervises the EOO emergency preparedness, response and recovery, and is 

comprised of the heads of the City’s critical emergency operations agencies (i.e., the 

Board of Public Works, Fire and Police departments, etc.). The Chief of Police acts as 

chair of the EOB, at the direction of the City Administrative Officer who is the vice chair 

and is responsible for coordinating non-emergency EOO activities. The City Attorney is 

the legal advisor to the EOB. The Mayor, in time of emergency, directs the operational 

divisions of the EOO. 

Each division is responsible for carrying out specific tasks for coordinating emergency 

actions which are essential in abating the impacts and limiting the scope of a catastrophe; 

responding to life threatening situations and safety needs of the population; maintaining 

and re-establishing essential services, transportation and communication networks; aiding 

dislocated people; and planning for recovery. 

Various City agencies are responsible for coordinating the activities of their assigned 

divisions. For example, the Traffic Division is responsible for developing plans for the 

maintenance of traffic control devices, emergency travel routes to be used in the event of 

an emergency, placement of barricades as necessary or as directed by the chiefs of the 


6.8-5


Police and Fire Suppression and Rescue Divisions, direction and control of traffic, and 

coordination with all other agencies supplying common carrier services. 

An Emergency Management Committee (EMC) provides staff to support the EOB. The 

EMC develops plans and programs and conducts training exercises to promote integrated 

disaster planning, response and mitigation efforts. An EOC of the EOO provides a 

centralized coordination facility for emergency response activities. The EOC is located 

underground and is equipped with vital communications and backup power, food, and 

other supplies necessary to provide for the needs of the EOO emergency response 

coordinating team. A mobile EOC unit is available in the event the primary center is 

inaccessible or to provide additional disaster response coordination capability. It is 

comprised of a van that contains portable offices, communications, self-sustaining power, 

and other resources to enable the mobile EOC unit to operate at any location to which it 

is sent. 

In the event of a disaster or emergency, the Mayor assumes emergency powers, as defined 

by law. City agencies follow procedures contained in their emergency plans, under the 

direction of the Mayor and Chief of Police, pursuant to EOO protocols set forth in the 

EOO ordinance and plans. 

Interagency Coordination 

Multi-Jurisdictional Planning 

City staff coordinates with other jurisdictions and regional agencies through the Office of 

Emergency Services Mutual Aid areas and planning efforts. 


Both informal and formal mutual aid arrangements have been developed between 

agencies and jurisdictions in the Los Angeles area. Typically, these agreements enable the 

closest available unit to respond to an emergency incident, which assures public safety, 

protection, and other assistance services. Mutual aid agreements provide for voluntary 

cooperative efforts and for provision or receipt of services and aid to or from other 

agencies or jurisdictions when local capabilities are exceeded by an emergency event. 

Through mutual aid agreements, the EOO and individual City agencies coordinate 

emergency response planning with adjacent cities, the County of Los Angeles, the State, 

federal agencies and other public and private organizations, such as School Districts and 

the American Red Cross. In addition, they share information so as to improve hazard 

mitigation efforts and coordinate resources for disaster response and recovery. For 

example, in the event of a disaster, Los Angeles County is required by State law to 

provide the City with coroner, health, mental health, prosecutorial, court and children’s 

services. 

The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) is designated by law to provide 

coordination and State resources to regions or local areas that are declared disaster areas 

6.8-6 



by the Governor. The Los Angeles area, in which the City of Inglewood is situated, falls 

in the Southern Region of the State of California’s three regions as defined by the OES. 

Specifically, the City is in Area G of the Southern Region of the state Mutual Aid 

emergency management areas. 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is designated by federal law to 

coordinate and provide Federal resources to state and local governments relative to 

disasters declared by the President. The Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement, conceived 

by Los Angeles County in the late 1980s, provides for sharing of personnel and public 

works equipment between signatory cities and counties within the State during times of 

emergency. 

Private Organizations 

In addition to agreements between government entities, private organizations play a key 

role in disaster planning and response. In particular, the American Red Cross, Salvation 

Army, churches and other non-profit organizations provide food, shelter, clothing, health 

care, volunteer labor and other emergency services to disaster victims, in coordination 

with the governmental agencies. A variety of private sector organizations coordinate 

community emergency preparedness efforts, to heighten public awareness and 

understanding of the need for disaster preparedness and to encourage private disaster 

preparedness activities. City park facilities as well as Hollywood Park and Inglewood 

Unified School District facilities are the designated assembly and coordination locations 

for emergency sheltering and assistance efforts coordinated by the Red Cross, the State 

and/or FEMA. In addition, the Red Cross provides interagency emergency response 

planning and training support. 

General Mandates and Guidelines 

Local officials have the authority to declare a local emergency and to invoke emergency 

regulations to facilitate response to the emergency. Planning and preparedness are critical 

in mitigating the extent of the impacts of a disaster, through pre-disaster abatement, predisaster 

response preparation, and post-disaster recovery plans. FEMA and the State 

identifies local multi-hazard mitigation plans as key tools to assisting local jurisdictions in 

prioritizing mitigation programs and projects to prevent or reduce the possible damage 

that can be inflicted on the City and its residents from the various disasters that threaten 

it. 


Federal 

Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 

In 2000, the Disaster Mitigation Act was signed into law to amend the Robert T. Stafford 

Disaster Relief Act of 1988. Among other things, this new legislation reinforces the 

importance of pre-disaster infrastructure mitigation planning to reduce disaster losses 


6.8-7


nationwide, and is aimed primarily at the control and streamlining of the administration 

of federal disaster relief and programs to promote mitigation activities. Some of the major 

provisions of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 include: 

• Funding for pre-disaster mitigation activities. 

• Developing experimental multi-hazard maps to better understand risk. 

• Establishing state and local government infrastructure mitigation planning 

requirements (in North Carolina the program known as AIM—Advance 

Infrastructure Mitigation). 

• Defining how states can assume more responsibility in managing the Hazard 

Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). 

• Adjusting ways in which management costs for projects are funded. 

The mitigation planning provisions outlined in Section 322 of the Act establish 

performance-based standards for mitigation plans and requires states to have a public 

assistance program (Advance Infrastructure Mitigation—AIM) to develop county 

government plans. The consequence for counties of failure to develop an infrastructure 

mitigation plan is the chance of a reduced federal share of damage assistance from 

75 percent to 25 percent if the damaged facility has been damaged on more than one 

occasion in the preceding ten-year periods by the same type of event. 

State 

Office of Emergency Services 

The OES serves as the lead State agency for emergency management in California. OES 

coordinates the State response to major emergencies in support of local government. The 

primary responsibility for emergency management resides with local government. Local 

jurisdictions first use their own resources and, as they are exhausted, obtain more from 

neighboring cities and special districts, the county in which they are located, and other 

counties throughout the State through the Statewide Mutual Aid System. In California, 

SEMS provides the mechanism by which local government requests assistance. OES 

serves as the lead agency for mobilizing the State’s resources and obtaining federal 

resources; it also maintains oversight of the State’s mutual aid system. 

During an emergency, OES coordinates the State’s response efforts. It is also responsible 

for collecting, verifying, and evaluating information about the emergency, facilitating 

communication with local government and providing affected jurisdictions with 

additional resources when necessary. If necessary, OES may task state agencies to 

perform work outside their day-to-day and statutory responsibilities. 

California Code of Regulations, Title 19 

Title 19, chapters one through six, of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) 

establishes regulations related to emergency response and preparedness under the OES. 

6.8-8 



Local 

As discussed throughout this section, the City’s Emergency Plan and Hazard Mitigation 

Plan identify the City’s planned response to extraordinary emergency situations. They 

provide operational concepts related to various emergency situations, identify 

components of the local emergency management organization, and describe the City’s 

overall responsibilities for protecting life and property during an emergency. 

• Issues 

No issues have been identified related to emergency preparedness. 


City of Inglewood, 2004. Hazard Mitigation Plan. 

City of Inglewood, 1999. Multi-Hazard Functional Plan. 


6.8-9

6.9 Noise 

6.9 NOISE 

This Section describes the environmental noise conditions within the City of Inglewood. 

Data used in the preparation of this Section are based upon various federal and state 

sources and existing traffic data provided by Meyer, Mohaddes Associates. In addition, 

ambient noise levels in the City were quantified by measuring existing noise levels. 

• Fundamentals of Sound and Environmental Noise 

Sound is technically described in terms of amplitude (loudness) and frequency (pitch). 

The standard unit of sound amplitude measurement is the decibel (dB). The decibel scale 

is a logarithmic scale that describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations that 

make up any sound. The pitch of sound is related to the frequency of the pressure 

vibration. Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to a given sound level at all 

frequencies, a special frequency-dependent rating scale has been devised to relate noise to 

human sensitivity. The A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) provides this compensation by 

discriminating against frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human 

ear. 

Noise is typically defined as unwanted sound. A typical noise environment consists of a 

base of steady “background” noise that is the sum of many distant and indistinguishable 

noise sources. Superimposed on this background noise is the sound from individual local 

sources. These can vary from an occasional aircraft or train passing by to virtually 

continuous noise from, for example, traffic on a major roadway. Table 6.9-1 lists 

representative noise levels for the environment. 

Several rating scales have been developed to analyze the effect of community noise on 

people. Since environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that the 

effect of noise on people is largely dependent upon the total acoustical energy content of 

the noise, as well as the time of day when the noise occurs. Noise metrics applicable to 

this analysis include the following: 

• L eq , the equivalent energy noise level, is the average acoustic energy content of 

noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the L eq of a time-varying noise and that of a 

steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during 

exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, 

regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night. The L eq is a 

measure of ambient noise levels. 

• L dn , the Day-Night Average Level, is a 24-hour average L eq with a 10 dBA 

“weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account 

for noise sensitivity in the nighttime. The logarithmic effect of these additions is 

that a 60 dBA 24-hour L eq would result in a measurement of approximately 

66.4 dBA (L dn ). L dn is a measure of community noise levels. 

• CNEL, the Community Noise Equivalent Level, is a 24-hour average L eq with a 10 

dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and an 

additional 5 dBA weighting during the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. to account 


6.9-1


for noise sensitivity in the night and evening, respectively. The logarithmic effect of 

these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour L eq would result in a measurement of 

approximately 66.7 dBA (CNEL). CNEL is a measure of community noise levels. 

• L min , the minimum instantaneous noise level experienced during a given period of 

time. 

• L max , the maximum instantaneous noise level experienced during a given period of 

time. 

Table 6.9-1 Representative Environmental Noise Levels 

Common Outdoor Activities 

Noise Level 

(dBA) 

Common Indoor Activities 

—110— Rock Band 

Jet Fly-over at 100 feet 

—100— 

Gas Lawnmower at 3 feet 

—90— 

Food Blender at 3 feet 

Diesel Truck going 50 mph at 50 feet —80— Garbage Disposal at 3 feet 

Noisy Urban Area during Daytime 

Gas Lawnmower at 100 feet —70— Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feet 

Commercial Area 

Normal Speech at 3 feet 

Heavy Traffic at 300 feet —60— 

Large Business Office 

Quiet Urban Area during Daytime —50— Dishwasher in Next Room 

Quiet Urban Area during Nighttime —40— 

Quiet Suburban Area during Nighttime 

Quiet Rural Area during Nighttime 

Theater, Large Conference Room 

(background) 

—30— Library 

Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall 

(background) 

—20— 

Broadcast/Recording Studio 

—10— 

Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing —0— Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing 

SOURCE: California Department of Transportation, 1998 

Noise environments and consequences of human activities are usually well represented by 

median noise levels during the day, night, or over a 24-hour period. Environmental noise 

levels are generally considered low when CNEL is below 60 dBA, moderate in the 60 to 

70 dBA range, and high above 70 dBA. Examples of low daytime noise levels are isolated 

natural settings that can provide noise levels as low as 20 dBA and quiet, suburban, 

residential streets that can provide noise levels around 40 dBA. Examples of moderatelevel 

noise environments are urban residential or semi-commercial areas (typically 55 to 

6.9-2 


6.9 Noise 

60 dBA) and commercial locations (typically 60 dBA). Higher levels are usually associated 

with more noisy urban residential or residential-commercial areas (typically 60 to 75 dBA) 

or dense urban or industrial areas (typically 65 to 80 dBA). 

When evaluating changes in community noise levels, a difference of three dBA in noise 

levels is barely perceptible to most people. A five dBA change is readily noticeable, while 

a difference of 10 dBA would be perceived as a doubling of loudness. 

Noise levels from a particular source decline as distance to the receptor increases. Other 

factors, such as weather and reflecting or shielding, also help intensify or reduce the noise 

level at any given location. A commonly used rule of thumb for roadway noise is that for 

every doubling of distance from the source, the noise level is reduced by about three dBA 

at acoustically “hard” locations (i.e., the area between the noise source and the receptor is 

nearly complete asphalt, concrete, hard-packed soil, or other solid materials) and 4.5 dBA 

at acoustically “soft” locations (i.e., the area between the source and receptor is normal 

earth or has vegetation, including grass). Noise from stationary or point sources is 

reduced by about 6 to 7.5 dBA for every doubling of distance at acoustically hard and soft 

locations, respectively. Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures; 

generally, a single row of buildings between the receptor and the noise source reduces the 

noise levels by about five dBA, while a solid wall or berm reduces noise levels by five to 

ten dBA. The manner in which older homes in California were constructed generally 

provides a reduction of exterior-to-interior noise levels of about 20 to 25 dBA with 

closed windows. The exterior-to-interior reduction of newer residential units is generally 

30 dBA or more. 

• Existing Noise Environment 

Sources of Noise 

Land uses within the City of Inglewood include a range of residential, commercial, 

industrial, institutional, and recreational areas. The primary sources of noise within the 

City are related to transportation and include automobile traffic and aircraft. Noise within 

the City also occurs from various stationary sources, such as mechanical equipment 

associated with building structures, the operation of various types of commercial 

businesses, and sources produced at residential locations. The noise sources are further 

described below. 

Roadway Sources 

The most prevalent source of traffic noise within the City of Inglewood is generated on 

surface streets. Motor vehicle noise generated by automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, and 

buses commonly causes increased sustained noise levels and is often in close proximity to 

sensitive land uses, such as residences. In addition, Interstate 405 and Interstate 105 are 

located along portions of the western and southern edges of the City, respectively. These 

freeways expose a portion of City residents to the south and west to higher ambient noise 

levels than other residential areas in the City. 


6.9-3


Major streets in the City of Inglewood include Inglewood, Centinela, Florence, 

Manchester, La Brea, and Prairie Avenues and Century and Crenshaw Boulevards. 

Residential uses near arterial roadways may experience attenuated noise levels from the 

presence of any large-scale commercial structures separating the residential area from 

those arterials, from yard walls or barriers, and from the distance between the roadway 

and the residential structures. The noise attenuation features of new residential uses are 

reviewed on a project-by-project basis as part of the City’s development review process. 

As new residential projects are proposed near major roadways or other potential noise 

sources, future noise levels can be evaluated and noise mitigation strategies required as 

appropriate to meet City noise standards. 

Aircraft Sources 

Land uses within the City of Inglewood are affected by aircraft approaches, and 

departures to a lesser extent, at the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). In addition, 

aircraft activity at the Hawthorne Municipal Airport may occasionally affect residential 

uses located in the southern portion of the City. The California Division of Aeronautics 

has adopted the CNEL as their methodology for describing airport noise exposure and 

requires land uses within the 65 dBA CNEL contour around airports to be compatible 

with airport operations. Land uses considered incompatible within the 65 dBA CNEL 

airport noise contour are single-family and multi-family residences, trailer parks, schools, 

hospitals, and childcare facilities. 

Stationary Sources 

A wide variety of stationary sources that are typical of an urban setting are present in the 

City of Inglewood. The City contains many different uses (e.g., commercial, residential, 

institutions, public facilities, utilities, etc.), all of which can produce noise. Residential 

areas can generate noise through the use of heating and cooling equipment and through 

landscape maintenance equipment such as gasoline-powered lawnmowers. Commercial 

uses can generate noise through the operation of rooftop heating and cooling equipment, 

and other operational activities such as trash deposit and collection, noise emanating 

from within businesses, and deliveries. Outdoor sports facilities that attract large numbers 

of spectators, such as Hollywood Park, can produce noise that affects nearby receptors. 

Existing Noise Levels 

Monitored Locations 

Existing ambient daytime noise levels were measured at 11 locations within the City of 

Inglewood on March 1, 2006. The selected locations are representative of typical land 

uses within the City. The purpose of the noise measurements was to both characterize 

typical ambient noise levels and to identify major noise sources in the City. Noise 

measurements were completed at residential neighborhoods, hospitals, a park, a high 

school, The Forum, Hollywood Park, and along heavily traveled roadways. The noise 

monitoring locations are shown in Figure 6.9-1. 

6.9-4 


W 64TH ST 

D 

LA CIENEGA B VL 

S 

ASH AV 

S 

ST 

N MARKET 

ST 

MARKET 

S 

ST 

LOCUST 

S 

AV 

OSAGE 

S 

CULLEN WY 

CLUB DR 



NOISE MONITORING LOCATIONS 

LO S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y 

W 64TH ST 

W 64TH PL 


N LA BREA AV 


W ELLIS AV 


CENTINELA AV 

E HARGRAVE ST 

E BRETT ST 


E BRETT ST 


E 65TH ST 

E 66TH ST 

WEST 

BLVD 

D 

AVIATION B VL 

W OLIVE ST 

S ISIS AV 

S HINDRY AV 

GLASGOW AV 

S 

l 

W HILL ST 

405 

W FLORENCE AV 

8 

W VICTOR AV 

W REGENT ST 

W QUEEN ST 

W OLIVE ST 

W KELSO ST 


W ELM AV 

W PLYMOUTH ST 

W VENICE WY 


W LIME ST 

W SPRUCE AV 

W MAGNOLIA AV 



OAK ST 

S 

1 


HOLLY ST 

S 

W 96TH ST 

W 97TH ST 


2 

N OAK ST 

ROSEWOOD AV 

S 

AV 

EUCALYPTUS 

S 

TRURO AV 

S 

N FIR AV 

FIR AV 

S 

W IVY AV 

ST 

WALNUT 

S 

GREVILLEA AV 

S 

MAPLE AV 

S 

E STEPNEY ST 

LA BREA AV 

S 

HYDE PARK PL 

E HAZEL ST 

ORCHARD DR 

S 

E WARREN LN 

E SPRUCE AV 

LARCH ST 

S 

E TAMARACK AV 

MYRTLE AV 

S 

N PARK AV 

E FLORENCE AV 

E GRACE AV 

N PRAIRIE AV 

E REGENT ST 

E QUEEN ST 

E KELSO ST 

E LA BREA DR 

E BUCKTHORN ST 


FLOWER ST 

S 

E AERICK ST 


9 

10 

AV 

OSAGE 

S 

3 

S PRAIRIE AV 


4 

E HARDY ST 

KAREEM CT 

REDONDO BLVD 

5 

Hollywood 

Park 

Lake 

BLVD 

WEST 

W 74TH ST 

VICTORIA AV 

PINCAY DR 

LUTHER LN 

POETS LN 

W 79TH ST 

W 81ST ST 

W 82ND ST 

W 82ND PL 

W 83RD ST 

W 84TH PL 

12TH AV 

S 



Los Angeles 

11TH AV 

11TH AV 

S 

10TH AV 

S 

10TH AV 

S 

8TH AV 

S 

CRENSHAW BLVD 

W 76TH ST 

W 77TH ST 

W 78TH ST 

W 78TH PL 

W 79TH ST 

W 80TH ST 

W 81ST ST 

W 82ND ST 

W 84TH ST 

W 84TH PL 

W 85TH ST 

W 88TH ST 

W 90TH ST 

8TH AV 

S 

6TH AV 

S 

5TH AV 

S 

5TH AV 

S 

11 

MAITLAND AV 

4TH AV 

S 

S BYRD AV 

3RD AV 

S 

2ND AV 

S 

AV 

VAN NESS 

S 

AV 

VAN NESS 

S 

Angeles 

Los 




Los Angeles 

W 98TH ST 

W 99TH ST 

BURIN AV 

S 

HAWTHORNE BLVD 

S 

W 101ST ST 

W 103RD ST 


W 102ND ST 

W 104TH ST 

W 105TH ST 

W 106TH ST 

YUKON AV 

6 

W 101ST ST 

W 104TH ST 

Legend 


Water Body 

Lennox 

LO S 

A N G E L E S 

C O U N T Y 

Metro Rail 

Railroad 



Hawthorne 

S PRAIRIE AV 

W 107TH ST 

W 108TH ST 

W 109TH ST 

W 110TH ST 

W 111TH ST 

W 111TH PL 

W 112TH ST 

W 113TH ST 

DOTY AV 

S 


1. Multi-Family Residential Neighborhood 

2. Daniel Freeman Memorial Park 

3. Rogers Park 

10. Manchester Boulevard 

4. The Forum 

11. Single-Family Residential Neighborhood 


6. Morningside High School 

7. Single-Family Residence Near I-105 

8. Single-Family Residence Near I-405 

9. Centinela Hospital Medical Center 

105 

W 116TH ST 

W 117TH ST 

W 118TH ST 

7 

W 118TH PL 

S CHERRY AV 

S DEHN AV 

AV 

LEMOLI 

S 

AV 

SIMMS 

S 

W 108TH ST 

ATKINSON AV 

ARDATH AV 

WILKIE AV 

THOREAU ST 

W 111TH ST 

W 112TH ST 


S SPINNING AV 

W 115TH ST 

LO S 

A N G E L E S 

C O U N T Y 

Source: TAHA, April 2006. 



Not to Scale 

Figure 6.9-1

6.9 Noise 

The noise levels were measured using a Quest Q-400 Noise Dosimeter, which satisfies 

the American National Standards Institute for general environmental noise measurement 

instrumentation. The average noise levels and sources of noise measured at each location 

are identified in Table 6.9-2. These daytime noise levels are characteristic of a typical 

urban area. 

Table 6.9-2 

Existing Daytime Noise Levels at Selected Locations a 

Location 

Primary Noise Sources 

15-Minute 

Leq (dBA) 

Lmin 

(dBA) 

Lmax 

(dBA) 

1 

Multi-family Residential 

Neighborhood 

Light traffic, car horn, birds, 

pedestrians 

57.2 46.2 71.3 

2 Rogers Park 

Medium traffic, gardening 

equipment, truck noise, 

birds 

56.4 55.3 57.1 

3 

Daniel Freeman Memorial 

Hospital 

Medium traffic, aircraft, 

sirens, music, birds 

58.5 56.5 60.8 

4 The Forum 

5 Hollywood Park 

6 Morningside High School 

Light traffic, aircraft, 

parking lot activity, birds, 

pedestrians 

Medium traffic, truck 

reverse alarm, car horn, 

siren 

Medium traffic, pedestrians, 

school activity, car door 

slam 

58.2 55.2 59.2 

69.2 64.1 75.6 

65.3 60.9 73.2 

7 

Single-family Residence 

Near Interstate 105 

Freeway noise, aircraft 69.8 59.3 83.6 

8 

Single-family Residence 

Near Interstate 405 

Freeway noise, aircraft, 

pedestrians, tree trim 

equipment 

62.5 50.6 76.6 

9 

Centinela Hospital 

Medical Center 

Medium traffic, car horn, 

car door slam, car music 

73.0 55 82.6 

10 Manchester Boulevard 

Heavy traffic, aircraft, car 

horn, pedestrians 

62.1 49.1 75.2 

11 

Single-family Residential 

Neighborhood 

Light traffic, pedestrians, 

siren, car horn, car music, 

birds 

55.7 54.7 56.4 

SOURCE: TAHA, 2006 

a Noise levels were monitored for 15 minutes at each location on March 1, 2006. 

Roadway Noise Levels 

Existing 24-hour noise levels have been calculated for various City roadways using the 

Federal Highway Administration Highway (FHWA) noise calculation formulas 

(RD-77-108). The model calculates the average noise level at specific locations based on 


6.9-7


traffic volumes, average speeds, roadway geometry, and site environmental conditions. 

The average vehicle noise rates (energy rates) utilized in the FHWA noise calculation 

formulas have been modified to reflect average vehicle noise rates identified for 

California by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The Caltrans data 

show that California automobile noise is 0.8 to 1.0 dBA higher than national levels and 

that medium and heavy truck noise is 0.3 to 3.0 dBA lower than national levels. 

Existing roadway noise contours are shown in Figure 6.9-2. Noise levels were modeled 

for the roadways with the highest traffic volumes in the City. The calculated roadway 

noise levels are presented in Table 6.9-3 along with the distances to various noise level 

contours. As shown, land uses located in proximity to Interstate 405 and Interstate 105 

and land uses that are located adjacent to major arterials are exposed to noise levels of 70 

dBA (CNEL) or more. Additionally, a majority of the City is exposed to noise levels of 60 

dBA (CNEL) or more. 

Table 6.9-3 

Roadway Segment 

Existing Roadway Noise Levels 

Reference Distance to Noise Contour (feet) 

CNEL at 

100 Feet a 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 

North/South Streets 

Aviation Blvd from Manchester Blvd to Arbor Vitae St 70 98 310 980 

La Cienega Blvd, north of Centinela Ave 76 409 1294 4,093 

La Cienega Blvd from Centinela Ave to I-405 Ramps 75 350 1105 3,496 

La Cienega Blvd from I-405 Ramps to Florence Ave 71 138 437 1,383 

La Cienega Blvd from Florence Ave to Manchester Blvd 70 94 298 942 

La Cienega Blvd from Manchester Blvd to I-405 Ramps 70 104 330 1,043 

La Cienega Blvd from I-405 Ramps to Hillcrest Blvd 71 124 393 1,242 

La Cienega Blvd from Hillcrest Blvd to Arbor Vitae St 70 95 302 954 

La Cienega Blvd from Arbor Vitae St to I-405 Ramps 71 115 363 1,147 

La Cienega Blvd from I-405 Ramps to Century Blvd 72 145 458 1,447 

La Cienega Blvd, south of Century Blvd 72 168 530 1,675 

La Brea Ave, north of Centinela Ave 73 215 680 2,149 

La Brea Ave from Centinela Ave to Hyde Park Blvd 72 177 559 1,768 

La Brea Ave from Hyde Park Blvd to Florence Ave 73 180 569 1,798 

La Brea Ave from Florence Ave to Manchester Blvd 72 173 548 1,734 

La Brea Ave from Manchester Blvd to Hillcrest Blvd 71 117 371 1,172 

La Brea Ave from Hillcrest Blvd to Arbor Vitae St 72 162 511 1,615 

La Brea Ave from Arbor Vitae St to Century Blvd 72 164 519 1,642 

La Brea Ave, south of Century Blvd 73 188 595 1,883 

Prairie Ave from Florence Ave to Regent St 72 158 501 1,584 

Prairie Ave from Regent St to Manchester Blvd 73 179 567 1,793 

6.9-8 


6.9 Noise 

Table 6.9-3 




CNEL at 


Prairie Ave from Manchester Blvd to Kelso St 73 179 567 1,794 

Prairie Ave from Kelso St to Arbor Vitae St 73 196 619 1,958 

Prairie Ave from Arbor Vitae St to Century Blvd 73 180 570 1,804 

Prairie Ave from Century Blvd to Lennox Blvd 73 200 633 2,001 

Prairie Ave from Lennox Blvd to I-105 Ramps 73 220 695 2,196 

Prairie Ave from I-105 Ramps to Imperial Hwy 72 152 480 1,519 

Crenshaw Blvd, north of 8 th St 73 192 606 1,916 

Crenshaw Blvd from 8 th St to Manchester Blvd 73 197 624 1,974 

Crenshaw Blvd from Manchester Blvd to 90 th St 73 188 593 1,876 

Crenshaw Blvd from 90 th St to Arbor Vitae St 73 204 645 2,039 

Crenshaw Blvd from Arbor Vitae St to Century Blvd 73 191 605 1,913 

Crenshaw Blvd from Century Blvd to 108 th St 74 237 751 2,373 

Crenshaw Blvd from 108 th St to Imperial Hwy 73 215 679 2,146 

Crenshaw Blvd, south of Imperial Hwy 73 196 621 1,965 

Van Ness Ave, north of Manchester Blvd 69 81 257 813 

Van Ness Ave from Manchester Blvd to Arbor Vitae St 69 74 233 735 

Van Ness Ave from Arbor Vitae St to Century Blvd 68 70 222 701 

Van Ness Ave from Century Blvd to 108 th St 69 74 233 737 

Van Ness Ave from 108 th St to Imperial Hwy 69 75 237 751 

I-405 from Manchester Blvd to Century Blvd 81 1,406 4,446 14,058 

East/West Streets 

Centinela Ave from La Cienega Blvd to Beach St 72 172 545 1,724 

Centinela Ave from Beach St to La Brea Ave 72 173 546 1,726 

Centinela Ave from La Brea Ave to Hyde Park Pl 72 144 457 1,444 

Centinela Ave from Hyde Park Pl to Hyde Park Blvd 71 132 417 1,317 

Centinela Ave from Hyde Park Blvd to Florence Ave 71 130 412 1,301 

Florence Ave from Aviation Blvd to La Cienega Blvd 70 94 298 942 

Florence Ave from La Cienega Blvd to Eucalyptus Ave 71 127 402 1,271 

Florence Ave from Eucalyptus Ave to La Brea Ave 71 136 429 1,356 

Florence Ave from La Brea Ave to Hillcrest Blvd 71 127 402 1,272 

Florence Ave from Hillcrest Blvd to Centinela Ave 72 154 486 1,535 

Florence Ave from Centinela Ave to Prairie Ave 74 233 737 2,331 

Florence Ave from Prairie Ave to Redondo Blvd 74 232 733 2,318 

Florence Ave, east of Redondo Blvd 73 191 603 1,907 


6.9-9


Table 6.9-3 




CNEL at 


Manchester Blvd from Aviation Blvd to La Cienega Blvd 71 138 438 1,384 

Manchester Blvd from La Cienega Blvd to I-405 Ramps 73 196 621 1,964 

Manchester Blvd from I-405 Ramps to Inglewood Ave 73 195 618 1,955 

Manchester Blvd from Inglewood Ave to Eucalyptus Ave 73 188 594 1,879 

Manchester Blvd from Eucalyptus Ave to La Brea Ave 73 180 570 1,802 

Manchester Blvd from La Brea Ave to Hillcrest Blvd 72 162 512 1,620 

Manchester Blvd from Hillcrest Blvd to Prairie Ave 72 1,693 515 1,630 

Manchester Blvd from Prairie Ave to Crenshaw Dr 73 200 632 1,997 

Manchester Blvd from Crenshaw Dr to Crenshaw Blvd 71 131 413 1,306 

Manchester Blvd from Crenshaw Blvd to Van Ness Ave 73 200 632 1,997 

Arbor Vitae St from Aviation Blvd to La Cienega Blvd 70 99 313 990 

Arbor Vitae St from La Cienega Blvd to Inglewood Ave 70 90 285 902 

Arbor Vitae St from Inglewood Ave to Eucalyptus Ave 69 87 274 866 

Arbor Vitae St from Eucalyptus Ave to La Brea Ave 69 83 262 829 

Arbor Vitae St from La Brea Ave to Prairie Ave 69 72 227 718 

Century Blvd from La Cienega Blvd to I-405 Ramps 75 319 1,008 3,187 

Century Blvd from I-405 Ramps to Inglewood Ave 74 233 736 2,328 

Century Blvd from Inglewood Ave to La Brea Ave 74 226 714 2,259 

Century Blvd from La Brea Ave to Prairie Ave 73 179 565 1,787 

Century Blvd from Prairie Ave to Yukon Ave 73 178 564 1,784 

Century Blvd from Yukon Ave to Crenshaw Blvd 73 195 618 1,954 

Century Blvd from Crenshaw Blvd to Van Ness Ave 73 183 578 1,829 

Imperial Hwy from Prairie Ave to Yukon Ave 71 141 446 1,410 

Imperial Hwy from Yukon Ave to Crenshaw Blvd 71 138 437 1,382 

Imperial Hwy from Crenshaw Blvd to Van Ness Ave 72 152 479 1,516 

I-105, west of Crenshaw Blvd 81 1,226 3,876 12,258 

SOURCE: TAHA 2006 

a Distances are in feet from roadway centerline. The identified noise level at 100 feet from the roadway 

centerline is for reference purposes only as a point from which to calculate the noise contour distances. It does 

not reflect an actual building location or potential impact location. 

6.9-10 




EXISTING ROADWAY 

NOISE CONTOUR (CNEL) 

LOS ANGELES COUNTY 

64TH ST 

CENTINELA AVE 

CITY OF LOS ANGELES 

405 

ISIS AVE 

AVIATION BLVD 

HINDRY AVE 

GLASGOW AVE 

LA CIENEGA BLVD 

CEDAR AVE 

INGLEWOOD AVE 

ARBOR VITAE 

LA BREA AVE 

MANCHESTER BLVD 

95TH ST 

HARDY ST 

98TH ST 

HILLCREST BLVD 

TAMARACK AVE 

FLORENCE AVE 

PRARIE AVE 

90TH ST 

WEST BLVD 

8TH AVE 

CRENSHAW BLVD 

76TH ST 

78TH ST 

78TH PL 

79TH ST 

80TH ST 

85TH ST 

5TH AVE 

VAN NESS AVE 

CITY OF LOS ANGELES 

CENTURY BLVD 

101ST ST 

Legend 


DOTY AVE 

104TH ST 

108TH ST 

YUKON AVE 

LEMOLI AVE 

IMPERIAL HWY 

8TH PL 

6TH ST 

4TH ST 

2ND ST 



Railroad 

105 

DEHN AVE 

SIMMS AVE 

60dBA CNEL Noise Contour 

65dBA CNEL Noise Contour 

70 dBA CNEL Noise Contour 

Source: TAHA, May 2006. 

Date: May 1, 2006 


0 0.25 0.5 

Miles 

Figure 6.9-2

6.9 Noise 

Aircraft Noise Levels 

Figure 6.9-3 displays CNEL noise contours at LAX during the third quarter of 2005. As 

shown, the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour for both the northern and southern runways 

extend into the City of Inglewood. As such, aircraft noise levels may result in 

incompatible noise levels at various residential uses located within the City. LAX records 

noise-related aircraft complaints on a monthly basis. During 2005, an average of 

approximately seven households per month filed an average of approximately 35 noise 

complaints in the City. The City has implemented a voluntary Residential Sound 

Insulation Program funded by grants from Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) and the 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to lessen aircraft-related noise levels within 

residential uses. This program is further discussed below under the “City of Inglewood 

Regulations.” 

Aircraft noise from Hawthorne Municipal Airport may also be audible at various land 

uses within the City of Inglewood. CNEL contours have not been developed for the 

Hawthorne Municipal Airport. However, given the arrival and departure flight patterns 

along with the size of aircraft using the airport, it is unlikely that CNEL contours would 

reach incompatible levels within the City of Inglewood. 

Sensitive Land Uses 

Sensitive land uses are those uses that have associated human activities that may be 

subject to stress or significant interference from noise such as residences, schools, child 

care centers, hospitals, long-term health care facilities, convalescent centers, and 

retirement homes. Various standards have been developed to address the compatibility of 

land uses with noise levels. The applicable standards are presented in the following 

discussion. The standards place special emphasis on land uses that are considered to be 

sensitive to high noise levels. 

The City of Inglewood contains a number of each of these different land uses, including 

hospitals, libraries, retirement homes, parks and recreational facilities, public and private 

schools, religious institutions, and childcare facilities. 



Federal noise regulations relevant to the City of Inglewood are transportation related. 

Noncompliance with federal regulations may reduce federal funding within a city. FHWA 

requires abatement of highway traffic noise for highway projects through rules in the 

Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR Part 772). The Federal Transit Administration and 

the Federal Railroad Administration each require noise and vibration assessments for any 

mass transit or high-speed railroad projects that would pass by residential areas. For 

housing constructed with assistance from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 


6.9-13


Development, minimum noise insulation standards must be achieved (24 CFR Part 51, 

Subpart B). 

The FAA has prepared guidelines for acceptable aircraft noise exposure in its Federal 

Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 150 Noise Compatibility Planning Program. According 

to Part 150 guidelines, exterior aircraft exposures of 65 dBA CNEL or less and an interior 

exposure 45 dBA CNEL or less are considered acceptable for residential uses. 126 The 

FAR Part 150 Noise Compatibility Planning Program also provides funds for noise 

abatement in impacted areas. For a city to obtain noise abatement funds, FAA requires 

that local authorities provide evidence that they are preventing the introduction of new 

noise sensitive uses within noise impact areas. This policy is intended to encourage the 

promulgation and enforcement of local land use compatibility measures. 


The Sate of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research has published 

recommended guidelines for the preparation and content of the Noise Element of a 

General Plan. Each jurisdiction is required to consider these guidelines when developing 

the General Plan Noise Element and determining acceptable noise levels within the 

community. The purpose of the Noise Element is to limit the exposure of the community 

to excessive noise levels. A noise element must identify and appraise noise problems in 

the community by analyzing and quantifying current and projected noise levels for all 

stationary and mobile noise sources in the community. Noise contours are then 

developed and shown for all the noise sources in the community, and are eventually used 

as a guide for establishing a pattern of land uses that minimizes the exposure of 

community residents to excessive noise. 

Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations includes Sound Transmission Control 

requirements that establish uniform minimum noise insulation performance standards for 

new hotels, motels, dormitories, apartment houses, and dwellings other than detached 

single-family units. Specifically, Title 24 states that interior noise levels attributable to 

exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room of new dwellings. 

Dwellings are to be designed so that interior noise levels will meet this standard for at 

least ten years from the time of building permit application. 

The State Department of Health Services has adopted guidelines for use in assessing the 

compatibility of various land use types with a range of noise levels. These guidelines are 

presented in Table 6.9-4. As an example, an exterior noise level up to 65 dBA CNEL is 

“normally acceptable” for multi-family residential uses, without special noise insulation 

requirements. A noise level of 65 to 70 dBA CNEL or more is identified as "conditionally 

acceptable" for multi-family residential uses. Under the “conditionally acceptable” 

category, an analysis of the noise reduction requirements is required and noise insulation 

126 Although the noise standards identified by the FAA are based on L dn levels, CNEL is used in this 

Analysis. CNEL and L dn rarely differ by more than one dBA. 

6.9-14 




EXISTING LAX NOISE CONTOURS 

Legend 

Residential - Single-Family within Contour 

Residential - Multi-Family within Contour 

Airport Property 

City of Inglewood Boundary 

Landmarks 

Churches 

Hospitals 

Schools 

Noise Contours 

Airport Boundary 

Freeways 

Streets 

Source: Los Angeles World Airports. 

Date: May 15, 2006 


Figure 6.9-3

6.9 Noise 

Table 6.9-4 

Land Use Category 

Residential-Low Density Single 

Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes 

Land Use/Noise Compatibility Guidelines 

Community Noise Exposure (dBA, CNEL) 

55 60 65 70 75 80 

Residential-Multi-Family 

Transient Lodging – Motels, Hotels 

Schools, Libraries, Churches, 

Hospitals, Nursing Homes 

Auditoriums, Concert Halls, 

Amphitheaters 

Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator 

Sports 

Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 

Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water 

Recreation, Cemeteries 

Office Buildings, Business 

Commercial and Professional 

Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, 

Agriculture 

SOURCE: 

California Office of Noise Control, Department of Health Services 

Normally Acceptable – Specified land use is satisfactory based upon the assumption that any 

buildings involved are of normal conventional construction without any special noise insulation 

requirements. 

Conditionally Acceptable – New construction or development shall be undertaken only after a 

detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation 

features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air 

supply system or air conditioning, will normally suffice. 

Normally Unacceptable – New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If 

new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction 

requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. 

Clearly Unacceptable – New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. 


6.9-17


features need to be incorporated into the design of the land uses. Conventional 

construction with closed windows and fresh air supply system or air conditioning will 

normally suffice under this category. A noise level of 70 to 75 dBA CNEL is identified as 

“normally unacceptable” for multi-family residential uses. Under this category, an analysis 

of the noise reduction requirements is also required and noise insulation features need to 

be incorporated into the design of the land uses. 

City of Inglewood Regulations 


Article 2 (Noise Regulations) under Chapter 5, (Offenses, Miscellaneous) of the 

Inglewood Municipal Code establishes criteria and standards for the regulation of noise 

levels within the City. Section 5-29 of the City Municipal Code establishes the general 

standards relative to disturbance of peace as follows: 

… It shall be unlawful for any person at any location to create any noise, or 

to allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied, or 

otherwise controlled by that person, when the foregoing causes the noise 

level, when measured on any other property, to exceed any noise for the 

cumulative time periods specified [in the Noise Ordinance]. 

Sections 5-27 and 5-30 of the City Municipal Code establish base ambient noise levels 

and maximum residential exterior and interior noise levels. Table 6.9-5 and Table 6.9-6 

show the base ambient noise levels and maximum residential exterior and interior noise 

levels, respectively. According to Section 5-27 of the City Municipal Code, actual 

measurements exceeding the noise levels at the time and within the zones defined in 

Table 6.9-5 shall be employed as the base ambient noise level. In addition, no ambient 

noise shall be less than the noise level specified in Table 6.9-5. 

Table 6.9-5 

Base Ambient Noise Levels 

Decibels Time Land Use Zone 

45 dBA 10:00 P.M.–7:00 A.M. Residential 

55 dBA 7:00 A.M.–10:00 P.M. Residential 

65 dBA Anytime Commercial and uses not specified 

75 dBA Anytime Industrial 

SOURCE: City of Inglewood Municipal Code, Section 5-27 (Base Ambient Noise Level) of Article 2 (Noise 

Regulations) of Chapter 5 (Offenses, Miscellaneous) September 13, 1988 

6.9-18 


6.9 Noise 

Table 6.9-6 

Exterior Noise Levels 

Maximum Residential Noise Levels 

Noise Level Exceeded 

Maximum Duration Period 

(1) Base Ambient Noise Level (BANL) 30 minutes in any hour 

(2) 5 dBA above BANL 15 minutes in any hour 

(3) 10 dBA above BANL 5 minutes in any hour 

(4) 15 dBA above BANL 1 minute in any hour 

(5) 20 dBA above BANL Not permitted 

Interior Noise Levels 

(1) BANL 5 minutes in any hour 

(2) 5 dBA above BANL 1 minute in any hour 

(3) 10 dBA above BANL Not permitted 

SOURCE: City of Inglewood Municipal Code, Section 5-30 (Maximum Residential Noise Levels) of Article 2 

(Noise Regulations) of Chapter 5 (Offenses, Miscellaneous) September 13, 1988 

The City Municipal Code also regulates non-residential noise levels and construction 

noise. Section 5-31 (Maximum Nonresidential Noise Levels) states that noise levels at the 

exterior of non-residential properties shall not exceed the respective base ambient noise 

levels for commercial and industrial land uses for a maximum cumulative duration of 30 

minutes in any hour. Section 5-41 (Construction of Building and Projects, Noise 

Regulated) states that it is unlawful for any person within a residential zone, or within 

500 feet of a residential zone, to operate construction equipment or perform any outside 

construction or repair work between the hours of 8:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. in such a 

manner that causes annoyance or discomfort unless a permit has been obtained from the 

Permits and Licenses Committee of the City. 

Other sources of noise regulated in the City Municipal Code include the following: 

• Radios, televisions, and stereos 

• Publicly amplified sound 

• Hawkers and peddlers 

• Ice cream trucks 

• Drums and musical instruments 

• Machinery, equipment, fans and air conditioning 

• Motor driven vehicles 

• Vehicle repairs 

• Excessive train horn noise 

• Excessive aircraft noise 

• Jet engine testing 

• Animals and fowl 


6.9-19


Residential Sound Insulation Program 

The City of Inglewood’s Residential Sound Insulation Program is designed to reduce the 

impact of noise on homes under the flight path of LAX. The City offers sound insulation 

at no cost to residents living in neighborhoods with a recorded CNEL of 65 dBA and 

higher as shown on the map produced by the LAWA for the Fourth Quarter of 1992. 

This is a voluntary program funded by grants from LAWA and the FAA. The funding 

agreement with LAWA allocates 65 percent of the funds to the west side of the City and 

up to 35 percent of funds for noise impacted residences on the east side of the City. 

Within these areas, priority is given to the most noise-impacted blocks. Sound insulation 

improvements often include, but are not limited to, replacing standard doors and 

windows with acoustically rated doors and windows, adding insulation to attics, the 

addition of central air and heating to the home, and fitting chimneys and vents with 

dampers and/or acoustic louvers. 

• Issues 

• New development will likely further increase the number of noise sources within 


• Land uses located along major arterial streets and in proximity to Interstates 405 

and 105 are exposed to traffic-related noise levels of 70 dBA (CNEL) or more. 

• Residential neighborhoods will be exposed to noise generated by LAX in excess of 

65 dBA CNEL. 


Barry, T.M. and J.A. Reagan. FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD- 

77-108). 1978. 

City of Inglewood. 1987. Noise Element, City of Inglewood General Plan. 

———. Municipal Code. Chapter 5—Noise Regulations of Article 2. 

Los Angeles World Airports. 2005. LAX Noise Contour Map (3Q05). 

http://www.lawa.org/lax/laxContourMaps.cfm. Site accessed February 27, 2006. 

State of California. Department of Health Services. 1978. Noise/Land Use Compatibility 

Matrix. 

State of California. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 2003. General Plan 

Guidelines, Appendix C: Guidelines for the Preparation and Content of the Noise 

Element of the General Plan. October. 

United States Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. 1980a. 

Highway Noise Fundamentals. 

6.9-20 


CHAPTER 7 

Synthesis of Planning Issues 

This Chapter represents a summary of the issues identified in each of the preceding 

Sections of this Technical Background Report. The issues presented here, represent 

opportunities, constraints, challenges, or problems facing the City of Inglewood as related 

to each of the topical areas to be covered in the General Plan update. The identification 

and assessment of issues is an important component of the planning process as it 

provides a basis to target resources towards the goals, policies, and implementation 

programs that will be incorporated into the General Plan. 

The first column of the matrix below lists the issues identified in each of the respective 

TBR sections. Bullets are placed under the column headings Policy and/or Framework to 

indicate whether the issue statement may be addressed by policy, or if it provides a fact 

that should be considered in the update of the General Plan. 

Technical Background Report Issue Policy Framework 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 

Land Use 

Single-family homes are being increasingly replaced by condominiums or 

apartments in multi-family-zoned areas. 

The extensive area zoned for commercial along the arterial streets competes 

with the maintenance of a viable downtown. 

Many businesses along the major arterials have not been maintained and cannot 

provide adequate off-street parking due to inadequate lot size. The shallow lots 

and multiple small businesses lead to frequent curb cuts, congested streets and a 

lack parking. 

The City lacks signature development at major gateways into the City, such as 

Century and Manchester Boulevards from the west, and Prairie Avenue and 

Crenshaw Boulevard from the south. 

Many commercial corridors lack the amenities (streetscape, bus shelters, trees, 

etc.) necessary to encourage walking. 

Housing 

The City is experiencing a decrease in the single-family housing stock due, in 

part, to the demolition of older single-family homes in multi-family zones 

replaced by apartment or condominium development. 

The low percentage of home owners is an issue. Only 36 percent of Inglewood 

residents were owners in 2000, compared to 48 percent for the County. 

Housing availability in Inglewood is an issue. The vacancy rate for rental units 

declined dramatically over the last decade, from 7.1 percent in 1990 to 3.5 

percent in 2000. 

Inglewood’s housing stock is relatively old, compared to other South Bay 

communities. This represents a potential problem since a large number of the 

units are approaching the latter stages of their physical life span, which is 

generally associated with a more rapid rate of structural deterioration. 

Many homes are impacted by both direct and indirect effect of aircraft noise 

from LAX, which creates a major constraint to maintaining adequate housing 

conditions in the City. 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 


7-1

Chapter 7 Synthesis of Planning Issues 


Home prices have significantly increased in Inglewood and the region since 

2004, causing the purchase of many homes to be out of reach for a large 

● 

portion of the City’s residents. 

Overcrowding in the City increased substantially between 1990 and 2000, 

reflecting an increase in population growth without a relative increase in the 

number of housing units to meet this need. Additionally, overcrowding indicates 

that there may be a lack of housing that is suitable or affordable. 

● 

Economic Trends and Conditions 

The City’s existing employment base, with one-third of all jobs in the services 

sector, has the effect of lowering the average wage of local employment 


The City’s population age, 25 years and older, has achieved markedly lower 

levels of higher education than the total for the South Bay Cities and Los 

Angeles County. 

The City is currently witnessing leakage in most of its retail categories, with only 

General Merchandise performing above the Los Angeles County per capita 

average retail sales. 

In 2004, the unemployment rate in Inglewood was the second highest among the 

South Bay Cities at 8.3 percent, compared to 6.6 percent for Los Angeles 

County. 

Manufacturing declined by 31.9 percent from an estimated 2,685 jobs in 2001 

to 1829 jobs in 2004. 

The annual average salary in the City of Inglewood declined by 4.5 percent in 

constant 2005 dollars from $42,683 to $40,773 from 2001 to 2004. 

Per capita taxable retail sales in Inglewood were relatively low at $5,998 

amongst the cities in the South Bay; about 67 percent of the $8,980 area 

average. 

The City is generally lacking in strong regional retail centers. 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

Water System 

Retrofitting of Water Meters: City of Inglewood requires the replacing its water 

meters on all active accounts, including those for Municipal accounts (but exclude 

Fire Service meters). The effect of this project will be an increase in billable 

water consumption, thereby allowing the City of Inglewood to charge for water 

which is although being consumed, but has not been paid for. 

Sewer and Wastewater 

No issues have been identified related to sewer and wastewater. 

Storm Drains 

Local drainage problems may occur throughout the City. Staff is aware of local 

drainage threats such as stormwater runoff entering culverts or underground into 

storm sewers. 

Lack of maintenance can contribute to the flood hazard in urban areas. 

Solid Waste 

The City failed to meet new waste diversion and recycling services needed to 

meet the State’s 50 percent waste diversion goal and faces possible punitive 

State fines and other penalties. 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

7-2 




Electricity 

Existing electricity services, which include transmission and distribution lines, may 

need to be expanded to accommodate additional growth associated with new 

or expanded development. 

There is an issue of aesthetic in retaining electrical services in above-ground 

transmission lines. 

Natural Gas 

Existing natural gas service, which includes transmission and distribution lines, 

may need to be expanded to accommodate additional growth associated with 

new or expanded development. 

Telecommunications 

No issues have been identified related to telecommunications. 

Circulation 

While some progress has been made towards aligning intersections since the 

development of the previous Element, several locations still require detailed 

analysis and the implementation of mitigation measures or improvements if 

deemed necessary. 

As a result of traffic growth in the area and the physical limitations found along 

several major roadway facilities, some neighborhoods are experiencing 

problems with “cut-thru” traffic, or vehicles utilizing less congested neighborhood 

streets to bypass areas of congestion on more heavily traveled facilities. This 

situation degrades the surrounding neighborhoods in terms of quality of life and 

creates possible dangerous conditions. 

Contrary to the City’s Downtown Street Design Study which recommended the 

conversion of both La Brea Avenue and Market Street into directional one-way 

thoroughfares, currently, both streets still operate as two-directional facilities 

with La Brea Avenue bearing the brunt of overall growth in traffic volumes. 

Crenshaw Boulevard has seen a substantial increase in traffic volumes due to the 

completion of a freeway interchange with the Glenn Anderson Freeway (I-105), 

located immediately south of the City of Inglewood. This situation is magnified 

by the absence of a direct freeway interchange along either Western Avenue 

or Prairie Avenue, the two major north/south roadway facilities located on 

either side of Crenshaw Boulevard. 

The current revision of the LAX Master Plan is expected to include several 

significant improvements to roadway facilities such as Arbor Vitae Avenue, 

Century Boulevard, La Cienega Boulevard, Aviation Boulevard and Lennox 

Boulevard. These improvements will greatly affect the current traffic distribution 

across the City. 

Currently, the City does not have either a bicycle plan or any existing dedicated 

bicycle routes. 

Several areas of the City are currently experiencing issues regarding the lack of 

on-street parking. This may be the result of insufficient roadway right-of-way to 

accommodate growth in traffic volumes without sacrificing parking. 

COMMUNITY SERVICES 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

Schools 

The District has nine elementary schools and one middle school on year-round 

track, in order to relieve overcrowding within the district, as five elementary 

schools, one middle school, and one high school are over 90 percent of their 

enrollment capacity. 

● 


7-3



There is a demonstrated need for pre-schools in the Inglewood District, as 

indicated by waiting lists. 

● 

District enrollments are expected to increase in the Hollywood Park area and 

related attendance boundaries. 

● 

As stated above, school enrollments are expected to increase, but there are no 

plans to construct new schools to meet these future needs. 

● 

Recreation and Parks 

The City provides a low ratio of parkland to residents. While the northern and 

northeastern parts of Inglewood are adequately served by parks having 

recreational facilities; the southern and southwestern parts are not served by 

comparable facilities. 

Given the limited potential for new parkland acquisition, attention should 

continue to focus on improving access to and increasing the availability of 

recreational opportunities. 

The Senior Center is crowded beyond capacity. A new Senior Center has been 

planned and approved; however, a funding source has not been identified. 

Land acquired by the City in the southern and southwestern parts of the City 

with aircraft noise mitigation funds should be explored for recreational 


Library Services 

Overall library usage has been declining for the past two years. 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES 

Biological Resources 

While there is currently no federal or state listed species in the City, if one were 

to be identified at a later date, it could impact redevelopment activities within 


Hydrology and Water Quality 

Increasing urbanization will increase impervious surfaces, increasing stormwater 

runoff and sedimentation, thereby triggering potential decreases in water 

quality. 

Topography and Hillsides 

The City does not currently have regulations or policies to mitigate potential 

hazards, including landslides that could result from development in areas of the 

City with increasing gradients (i.e. Baldwin Hills area). 

Visual Resources 

Prairie Avenue has the potential to become a strong visual resources; however, 

large unscreened parking lots, lack of street improvements including a median 

parkway landscaping and onsite landscaping and buffers contribute to lack of 

visual appeal along the corridor for pedestrians and vehicles. 

Vacant store fronts and lack of maintenance along some of the City’s major 

corridors such as Imperial Highway create visually unappealing environments. 

Historical and Cultural Resources 

The City lacks a local register of historical resources or a historic preservation 

ordinance to protect and promote preservation of the City’s historic resources. 

The City has not performed local surveys or studies that evaluate resources 

outside of the downtown area that may be historically significant. 

Many of the commercial properties with historic value are vacant or contain 

businesses which are marginal or underutilized. 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

7-4 




The pressure for redevelopment continues to threaten historic residential and 

commercial structures within the City. 

● 

A large number of the existing historic areas have been negatively affected by 

incompatible architectural designs that do not acknowledge the historical context ● 

of surrounding development. 

Inglewood has limited venues suitable for the presentation of professional 

quality visual and performing artists. 

● 

The City of Inglewood is noted for sports and entertainment but lacks recognition 

for artist cultural opportunities 

● 

Air Quality 

The City lacks planning programs that reduce the length and or number of 

vehicle trips and encourage residents to work locally, rideshare, telecommute, or 

use alternative forms of transportation. 

The City lacks policies that discourage sensitive receptors near Interstates 405 

and 105. 

COMMUNITY SAFETY AND HAZARDS 

Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 

No issues have been identified related to geologic or mineral resources. 

Seismic Hazards 

The City of Inglewood is located within a seismically active region. Therefore, 

existing and future developments within the City are likely to be subject to 

potential seismic hazards, including subsidence, landsliding, and liquefaction 

depending on their location. 

Many public buildings, including the Civic Center, Inglewood Police 

Headquarters, County Superior Court Buildings and private institutions were 

designed or built prior to 1973 lack seismic retrofitting. 

Flood Hazards 

Inglewood is highly urbanized and the majority of the ground coverage consists 

of impervious surfaces, which can lead to an increase in volume and velocity of 

runoff after a rainfall event, increasing the potential for flood hazards. 

The City lacks a plan to address mitigation in areas of historical flooding during 

large storm events. 

Fire Hazards 

The older housing stock of the City could pose a fire hazard if upgraded fire 

prevention devices have not been installed. 

Hazards Materials 

With major freeways and truck routes that traverse the City, hazardous 

materials are routinely transported through the City. 

Police Services 

The existing Police Department is insufficient to accommodate the staffing and 

equipment that it currently has and needs. The Department has been using City 

Hall to house some of its divisions. 

Fire Services 

No issues have been identified related to fire services. 

Emergency Preparedness 

No issues have been identified related to emergency preparedness. 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 


7-5



Noise 

New development will likely further increase the number of noise sources within 


Land uses located along major arterial streets and in proximity to Interstates 

405 and 105 are exposed to traffic-related noise levels of 70 dBA (CNEL) or 

more. 

Residential neighborhoods will be exposed to noise generated by LAX in excess 

of 65 dBA CNEL.. 

● 

● 

● 

7-6 



Appendix A 

City of Inglewood General Plan 

Update Economic Conditions and 

Trends Report

DRAFT 


Economic Conditions and Trends 

General Plan Update 

Prepared for: 


One Manchester Blvd. 

Inglewood, CA 90301 

April 20, 2006 

SRHA JOB #1112 

11661 San Vicente Blvd. Suite 306 


310.820.2680, 310.820.8341 fax 

www.stanleyrhoffman.com

CONTENTS 

TABLES .......................................................................................................................................................III 

FIGURES.......................................................................................................................................................V 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................................VI 

CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 1 

1.1 Background and Purpose of Report ......................................................................................... 1 

1.2 Organization of Report ........................................................................................................... 1 

1.3 Regional Setting .................................................................................................................... 2 

1.4 Sources of Information............................................................................................................ 4 

CHAPTER 2 – COMMUNITY OVERVIEW .................................................................................................... 5 

2.1 Population ............................................................................................................................. 5 

2.2 Households ........................................................................................................................... 7 

2.3 Tenure .................................................................................................................................. 8 

2.4 Housing Units ...................................................................................................................... 10 

2.5 Overcrowding ...................................................................................................................... 13 

2.6 Race and Ethnicity ............................................................................................................... 14 

2.7 Age Distribution of Population ............................................................................................... 16 

2.8 Educational Attainment......................................................................................................... 18 

2.9 Labor Force......................................................................................................................... 20 

2.10 Household Income ............................................................................................................... 23 

2.11 Projected Population, Household and Employment Growth...................................................... 25 

CHAPTER 3 – BUSINESS OVERVIEW...................................................................................................... 28 

3.1 Overall 1994 to 2004 Employment Trends.............................................................................. 28 

3.2 NAICS Sectoral Employment and Salary Trends: 2001 to 2004................................................ 28 

3.3 Distribution of Establishments by Sector and Size: 2001 to 2004.............................................. 34 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. i Economic Conditions and Trends 

April 20, 2006 

City of Inglewood General Plan Update

3.4 Sectoral Clustering in the City of Inglewood............................................................................ 36 

3.5 City of Inglewood Compared with the Los Angeles County Economy........................................ 39 

CHAPTER 4 – MARKET CONDITIONS AND TRENDS ............................................................................. 40 

4.1 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales: 1994 to 2004....................................................................... 40 

4.2 City of Inglewood Taxable Retail Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 .................................................. 41 

4.4 Comparative Taxable Retail Sales......................................................................................... 43 

4.5 City of Inglewood Retail Leakage Analysis ............................................................................. 45 

4.6 Retail Market Inventory in the City of Inglewood...................................................................... 46 

4.7 Retail Market Lease and Vacancy Rates: 2006....................................................................... 46 

CHAPTER 5 – REAL ESTATE TRENDS.................................................................................................... 49 

5.1 Building Activity.................................................................................................................... 49 

5.2 Housing Value ..................................................................................................................... 52 

5.3 Multi-Family Rental Market.................................................................................................... 54 

CHAPTER 6– LOCATIONAL AND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES .......................................................... 55 

6.1 Los Angeles International Airport........................................................................................... 55 

6.2 Tourism and Lodging........................................................................................................ 56 

6.3 Hollywood Park.................................................................................................................... 57 

6.4 The Forum .......................................................................................................................... 57 

6.5 Downtown ........................................................................................................................... 57 

APPENDIX A............................................................................................................................................... 58 

APPENDIX B............................................................................................................................................... 60 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. ii Economic Conditions and Trends 

April 20, 2006 


TABLES 

2-1 Population Trends: 1990-2000 and 2000-2005...................................................................... 7 

2-2 Demographic Profile of Market Area: 2000-2005................................................................. 8 

2-3 Housing Tenure: 1990-2000 ..................................................................................................9 

2-4 Dwelling Units: 1990-2000.................................................................................................. 10 

2-5 Age of Housing Stock.......................................................................................................... 11 

2-6 Overcrowding ...................................................................................................................... 13 

2-7 Population by Race and Ethnicity: 2000.............................................................................. 14 

2-8 Age Distribution: 1990 and 2000......................................................................................... 16 

2-9 Educational Attainment of Population 25 years and older: 2000 ........................................ 18 

2-10 Labor Force: 1990 to 2000................................................................................................... 20 

2-11 Comparative Unemployment Rates: 1994 and 2004 ........................................................... 21 

2-11 Distribution of Income: 1990-2000 ..................................................................................... 23 

2-12 Average Household Income................................................................................................. 24 

2-13 Population, Households and Employment: Projections 2000-2030 ................................... 26 

3-1 Total Employment: 1994-2004........................................................................................... 29 

3-2 Employment by Sector: 2001-2004 ..................................................................................... 30 

3-3 Number of Establishments, Employment and Wages: 2001-2004 ...................................... 32 

3-4 Distribution of Establishments by Sectors: 2001 to 2004.................................................... 35 

3-5 Distribution of Firms by ZIP Codes..................................................................................... 37 

3-6 Locational Index of Sectors by ZIP Codes: 2003 ................................................................ 38 

3-7 Comparative Sectoral Specialization by Employment Distribution: 2004.......................... 39 

4-1 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales Trends: 1994-2004 ......................................................... 40 

4-2 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales by Retail Category: 1994-2004 ...................................... 42 

4-3 South Bay Cities: Taxable Retail Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 ............................................ 44 

4-4 Comparative Per Capita Taxable Retail Sales: 2004 ........................................................... 45 

4-5 Retail Market Inventory: 2006............................................................................................. 47 

4-6 Retail Market Lease and Vacancy Rates: 2006 ................................................................... 48 

5-1 Non-Residential Building Permit Valuations: 1994-2004................................................... 49 

5-2 Residential Building Activity: 1994-2004........................................................................... 51 

5-3 Single Family Median Sales Price: February 2006.............................................................. 52 

5-4 Condominium Median Sales Price: May 2005 .................................................................... 53 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. iii Economic Conditions and Trends 

April 20, 2006 


6-1 Transient Occupancy Tax Revenues in 2002-2003 ............................................................. 56 

A-1 SIC to NAICS Crosswalk .................................................................................................... 58 

A-2 Self Employment Rates by NAICS Categories ................................................................... 59 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. iv Economic Conditions and Trends 

April 20, 2006 


FIGURES 

1-1 City of Inglewood and Surrounding Areas .....................................................................................3 

2-1 Population Trends : 1970-2005....................................................................................................... 6 

2-2 Housing Tenure: Occupied Housing Units in 2000....................................................................... 9 

2-3 Age of Housing Stock.................................................................................................................. 12 

2-4 Race and Ethnicity: 2000............................................................................................................. 15 

2-5 Age Distribution in Inglewood and Los Angeles County............................................................ 17 

2-6 AA Degree and Above in City of Inglewood, South Bay Cities and L.A. County: 2000 ........... 19 

2-7 Comparative Unemployment Rates: 2004................................................................................... 22 

2-8 Average Annual Household Income: 1990-2000 ........................................................................ 24 

2-9 Projected Population and Employment Growth: Percent Change 2000 to 2030......................... 27 

3-1 Employment by Major Employment Categories: 2004 ............................................................... 29 

3-2 Service Sector Categories as Percent of Total Service Sector Employment: 2004 ..................... 31 

3-3 Average Annual Salary in 8 Largest Employment Sectors: 2004 ............................................... 33 

3-4 Average Annual Salary for Service Sector Industries: 2004 ....................................................... 34 

3-5 Distribution of Establishments by Sector: 2004 .......................................................................... 35 

3-6 Distribution of Firms by ZIP Codes............................................................................................. 38 

4-1 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales Trends: 1994-2004 ................................................................. 41 

4-2 Per Capita Taxable Retail Sales: 2004......................................................................................... 43 

5-1 Non Residential Building Activity: 1992-2004 ........................................................................... 50 

5-2 Residential Building Activity ...................................................................................................... 51 

5-3 Comparative Median Contract Rent: 2000 and 2006 .................................................................. 54 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. v Economic Conditions and Trends 

April 20, 2006 


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The purpose of this report is to provide an understanding of the existing demographic and 

economic conditions and trends in the City of Inglewood and the larger growth dynamics of the 

surrounding area. This provides the background information for evaluating significant economic 

issues, economic goals and policies and planning implications for the City’s General Plan update 

process. 

The City’s economic goals will encompass a range of areas, including: the creation of more 

residential opportunities; development of retail opportunities; and the pursuit of economic 

development opportunities oriented towards a diverse economic base. The following presents 

the key findings and trends, including: demographic trends; residential trends; employment 

trends; growth projections and market conditions and trends. 

Key Economic Issues 

• In the context of globalization, the US economy is witnessing a shift away from lower 

skilled manufacturing and service sector jobs, resulting in shrinking employment 

opportunities for lower education and lower skilled sections of the workforce. 

• The City of Inglewood needs to consolidate its present competitive advantage in sectors 

like Health Care and Social Services, and Transportation and Warehousing, while taking 

active policy measures to attract higher skilled activities in Scientific and Technical, 

Information, and the Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (FIRE) sectors. 

• The City’s existing employment base, with one-third of all jobs in the services sector, has 

the effect of lowering the average wage of local employment opportunities. The City 

needs to expand other sectors like professional services and specialized manufacturing. 

• In order to complement higher skilled activities, the City needs to pay special attention to 

education and skill enhancement programs for the resident workforce. The City’s resident 

labor force currently has lower levels of higher education compared to Los Angeles 

County averages. 

• The City is currently witnessing leakage in most of its retail categories, with only General 

Merchandise performing above the Los Angeles County per capita average retail sales. 

This indicates that the City has the opportunity to attract retail centers with greater 

community and regional focus. 

• The City has the opportunity to facilitate the redevelopment of large underutilized 

properties like the Hollywood Park and the Forum. The future expansion of Hollywood 

Park for gaming purposes is contingent on whether casino gaming in California is 

allowed outside Indian Reservations. 

• The City needs to leverage certain key locational attributes in order to enhance its 

competitive advantage. These opportunities include proximity to LAX, the LA-Long 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. vi Economic Conditions and Trends 

April 20, 2006 


Beach Port, local and regional connectivity through proximity to freeways I-405, I-105 

and I-101, and the Metro Green Line along the I-105. 

• The increasing attention being paid to public transportation in the wider Los Angeles and 

Southern California region needs to be incorporated into long-term development 

opportunities for the City and its local residents. 

• These development opportunities include transit oriented development and development 

of technology and business parks. 

• Being located adjacent to LAX, the greater Inglewood is already a favored lodging 

destination for tourists. Increasing public transportation connectivity within Los Angeles 

and the wider Southern California region will likely to create more lodging opportunities 

within the City. 

• Further, the City provides excellent future opportunities for businesses that serve 

specialized tourist needs. 

Demographic Trends 

• In the five-year period from 2000 to 2005, Inglewood’s population increased from 

112,580 in 2000 to 118,164 in 2005, at an average annual growth rate of 0.97 percent. 

• The average household size in Inglewood increased from 2.91 in 2000 to 3.22 in 2005. 

Similar increases in average household size have occurred in both the South Bay Cities 

and Los Angeles County. 

• The City of Inglewood’s average annual growth rate was also much lower than that of the 

South Bay Cities, 0.27 percent as compared to 0.63 percent in the period from 1990 to 

2000 and 0.97 as compared to 1.27 in the period from 2000 to 2005. 



Housing and Overcrowding 

• In both 1990 and 2000, about 36 percent of Inglewood’s population owned their housing 

unit while about 64 percent rented their place of residence. 

• Severe overcrowding, as defined as 1.51 or more occupants per room, increased 

significantly between 1990 and 2000 in both Inglewood and Los Angeles County. There 

was a 28.1 percent increase in the number of severely overcrowded housing units in 

Inglewood and a 35.3 percent increase in Los Angeles County. 

• Overcrowded units are a reflection of the increasing population growth without a relative 

increase in the number of housing units to meet this need. 

Race and Ethnicity 

• The City’s racial composition is markedly different from that of Los Angeles County as 

whole. In 2000, the non-Hispanic White population comprised only 4.1 percent of 

Inglewood’s population, compared with 31.1 percent in the County. 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. vii Economic Conditions and Trends 

April 20, 2006 


• In addition, the Black population in Inglewood is much greater than that of the County; 

46.4 percent of Inglewood’s population is Black as compared to just 9.5 percent of the 

County as a whole. 

• Persons of Hispanic origin are relatively equally represented in both the City and County. 

The City of Inglewood’s population is 46.0 percent Hispanic while L.A. County is 44.6 

percent Hispanic. 

Age Distribution of Population 

• In both Inglewood and Los Angeles County, the age group 35 to 64 is the largest portion 

of the population. This broad age group is considered to be the most experienced segment 

of the labor force. 

• As shown, in both Inglewood and Los Angeles County, those under age 18 are continuing 

to become an even larger segment of the population. This group consists primarily of 

minors who are not of working age. 



• With respect to those 65 years and over, the proportion of the population in this age 

group has remained relatively constant in both the City of Inglewood and Los Angeles 

County, as a whole. 

Educational Attainment 

• The City’s population age, 25 years and older, has achieved markedly lower levels of 

higher education than the total for the South Bay Cities and Los Angeles County. 

Employment 

• Sales and office occupations are the largest category of the labor force in the City of 

Inglewood, comprising 30.7 percent of the total jobs. This is slightly higher than Los 

Angeles County, which has 27.6 percent of the labor force employed in sales and office 

occupations. 

• The Management and Professional occupations comprised 24.6 percent of Inglewood’s 

labor force while 34.3 percent of Los Angeles County’s labor force were in this category. 

• In 2004, the unemployment rate in Inglewood was the second highest among the South 

Bay Cities at 8.3 percent, compared to 6.6 percent for Los Angeles County. 

Employment Trends 

• The City’s total employment (including self-employment) grew marginally from 30,886 

in 1994 to 31,127 in 2004, at an annual average growth rate of 0.1 percent. 

• In 2004, services formed the largest employment sector in the City with nearly 32 percent 

of the total jobs. 

• Manufacturing declined by 31.9 percent from an estimated 2,685 jobs in 2001 to 1829 

jobs in 2004. 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. viii Economic Conditions and Trends 

April 20, 2006 


• Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (FIRE) declined by 32.2 percent and Professional and 

Technical Services declined by 45.8 percent. 

Wage Trends 

• The annual average salary in the City of Inglewood declined by 4.5 percent in constant 

2005 dollars from $42,683 to $40,773 from 2001 to 2004. 

• Entertainment and Recreation jobs had the highest average salary of $81,424, followed 

by Government and Manufacturing jobs at $47,253 and $44,159, respectively. 

• Average salaries in the Wholesale, Services and Retail sectors are below the City average 

salaries of $40,733. These sectors comprised nearly 47 percent of the total employment in 

the City in 2004. 

Household Income 


$54,732 in 2000, much lower than the average household incomes of the South Bay cities 

and the County. 

Inglewood’s Economy Compared with the Los Angeles County 


Entertainment and Recreation sector compared to the County. This can be explained by 

the relatively higher impact of the Hollywood Park Race Track and Casino on the City’s 

employment base. 

• The economy of Inglewood was also relatively more specialized compared to Los 

Angeles County, as measured by the percent share of employment, in Transportation and 

Warehousing (3.2-times) and Health Care and Social Services (1.7-times). 

• However, the below–average employment shares relative to Los Angeles County in 

Professional, Scientific and Technical (0.2-times), Information (0.2-times), 

Manufacturing (0.5-times) and Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (0.6-times), indicate 

sectors for potential future growth in the City. 

Taxable Sales 

• Total taxable sales transactions in the City of Inglewood have grown from 1994 to 2004, 

increasing in constant 2005 dollars from about $675.0 million in 1993 to $833.2 million 

in 2004. 

• Taxable Retail sales in the City of Inglewood followed a pattern of initial decline from 

1994 to1999 and then rose appreciably from 2000 to 2004. These trends can be explained 

by stronger sales performance in key retail categories including General Merchandise, 

Building Materials and Apparel. 

• Per capita taxable retail sales in Inglewood were relatively low at $5,998 amongst the 

cities in the South Bay; about 67 percent of the $8,980 area average. 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. ix Economic Conditions and Trends 

April 20, 2006 


• Only General Merchandise performed above the Los Angeles County per capita average 

retail sales, indicating sizable retail leakage in most of Inglewood’s retail categories. 

• Long-term fiscal well-being of the City is important. Municipal revenues are needed for 

maintenance and improvement of infrastructure to accommodate growth. A balance of 

land uses should be the goal in order to provide key public revenues such as property tax 

and sales tax. 

Market Conditions 

• Sixteen retail centers surveyed in Inglewood have a total of 1,572,788 square feet of retail 

space; slightly over half of this space has been built since 2004. However, the City is 

generally lacking in strong regional retail centers. 

• The overall vacancy rate of these sixteen centers is relatively low at an estimated 4.3 

percent. 

• With its mix of retail and dining establishments, Downtown appears to be primarily a 

local-serving district. 

Real Estate Trends 

• The valuation for new commercial buildings displayed significant fluctuation over the 10 

year time period from 1994 to 2004. The valuation (in constant 2006 dollars) for new 

commercial buildings increased from just $612,000 in 1995 to about 28.3 million in 

2003. 

• In comparison, the addition of new industrial valuation over the same time period has 

been virtually non-existent. 

• The data indicates that on an average, 31 new residential units were permitted every year, 

of which 12 were single-family units and 20 were multi-family units. However, at least 

200 more units have been added to the housing stock since 2004. 

• The median price of a single-family residence sold in the City of Inglewood in February, 

2006 was $475,000. The median price of a condominium sold in the City of Inglewood in 

February, 2006 was around $330,000. 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. x Economic Conditions and Trends 

April 20, 2006 


Chapter 1 - INTRODUCTION 

1.1 Background and Purpose of Report 

The purpose of this report is to provide an understanding of the existing demographic and 

economic conditions and trends in the City of Inglewood and the larger growth dynamics of the 

surrounding area. This economic trends report includes baseline data and trends related to 

population, housing, employment, taxable sales and residential and non-residential market 

conditions. 

The findings of the report will provide the framework for preparing economic goals and policies 

and facilitate discussion of existing and future economic development efforts. These goals and 

policies will be developed within the context of the General Plan to insure that the City is able to 

maintain a strong economic base and take advantage of future employment opportunities. A 

strong economy not only provides the local workers with adequate income to afford a high 

quality of life, but it also provides local government with adequate public revenues to maintain a 

high quality of public services. 

The goal is to identify target economic opportunities that are both realistic and compatible with 

the City’s General Plan vision. In this context, the growth of the City’s economic base will 

depend on the identification of key industries that can be attracted to the City and support a 

diversified economy. Job types, salary and skill levels, income, land availability and location, 

and housing affordability are also important attributes of the economy. 

1.2 Organization of Report 

The following chapters of the report address the existing demographics and market conditions in 

the City, as well as economic trends. 

• The Executive Summary presents key economic issues and opportunities; 

• Chapter 1 presents the background, the purpose and organization of the report as well 

as the geographic study area boundaries and sources of information; 

• Chapter 2 – Community Overview, provides demographics related to population, 

households, income and labor force for the City compared to other South Bay 

communities and Los Angeles County; 

• Chapter 3—Business Setting, covers economic trends on employment and wages for 

the City and the County; 

Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 1 Economic Conditions and Trends 

April 20, 2006 


• Chapter 4 provides an assessment of current market conditions, including taxable 

retail and non-retail sales, 

• Chapter 5 includes trends of residential, commercial and industrial real estate market 

of the City and the region; 

• Chapter 6 addresses locational opportunities, including those concerning the Los 

Angeles International Airport, Hollywood Park and the lodging industry; 

1.3 Regional Setting 

Inglewood is centrally located within the Los Angeles Basin. The City of Inglewood is the 

northernmost City in the South Bay region of Los Angeles County. This region includes the 

cities of Inglewood, El Segundo, Hawthorne, Gardena, Lawndale, Manhattan Beach, Hermosa 

Beach, Redondo Beach, Torrance, Carson, Palos Verdes Estates, Lomita, Rolling Hills, Rolling 

Hills Estates, and Rancho Palos Verdes. The South Bay also includes portions of the City of Los 

Angeles along the Harbor Freeway and unincorporated parts of Los Angeles County. Inglewood 

is bordered by the City of Los Angeles to the north and east, Hawthorne to the south, and LAX 

to the west. The City is adjacent to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) and also about 15 

miles from the Los Angeles/Long Beach Port Complex. 

Two freeways directly serve Inglewood. The Century (105) Freeway runs from Norwalk to LAX 

and is accessible in the southern part of the City. The San Diego (405) Freeway runs from 

southern Orange County through the San Fernando Valley and is accessible in the western part 

of the City. In addition to direct freeway access, Inglewood is in close proximity to the Harbor 

(110) Freeway, which runs from Pasadena through Downtown Los Angeles to the Port of Los 

Angeles and the Santa Monica (10) Freeway, which runs east from the ocean in Santa Monica 

through Downtown Los Angeles to the Inland Empire. A regional vicinity map is presented in 

Figure1-1. 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 1-1 

City of Inglewood and Surrounding Areas 

Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates, Inc. 

1-1 City of Inglewood and Surrounding Areas 


April 20, 2006 


1.4 Sources of Information 

This study is based upon information from several sources including: 

• A field survey of the City of Inglewood; 

• Taxable sales data for the City of Inglewood, annual data for 1994 and 2004, from the 

California State Board of Equalization. 

• Economic and demographic data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990 and 2000, 

and the California Department of Finance, 2005; 

• Population, Household and Employment projections for 2000 – 2030 from the Southern 

California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan, 2004; 

• Building activity data for the City of Inglewood from the Construction Industry Research 

Board (CIRB) for 1995- 2005; 

• Interviews with key individuals knowledgeable about economic conditions in the City of 

Inglewood. 

• Published literature regarding retail activity, including the National Research Bureau’s 

2003 Shopping Center Directory and the Urban Land Institute’s Dollars and Cents of 

Shopping Centers, 2004; 

• Inglewood Economic Development Opportunities Assessment Report, Volume I, Kosmont 

Partners, February 2003; 

• City of Inglewood Citywide Economic Development Strategic Plan. Wilbur Smith 

Associates in Association with USC Center for Economic Development, January, 2005; 


April 20, 2006 


Chapter 2 – COMMUNITY OVERVIEW 

This chapter provides a descriptive profile of demographic characteristics and trends for the City 

of Inglewood. This includes population, households, household income, housing characteristics 

and employment. In addition, key demographics for the South Bay communities, including 

population, households and income are discussed. 

2.1 Population 

Population Growth from 1970 to 2005 

• Figure 2-1 illustrates the population growth trends for the City of Inglewood from 1970 to 

2005; in this period of time, the average annualized growth rate was 0.78 percent. 

• As shown, modest growth occurred in the period from 1970 to 1980; this increase from 

89,985 in 1970 to 94,162 in 1980 represents an increase in the population of 4,177, which 

amounts to an average annualized growth rate of 0.46 percent. 

• As shown, the most rapid rate of growth occurred in the 1980’s when the population jumped 

from 94,162 in 1980 to 109,602 in 1990. This increase of over 15,000 represents more than a 

15 percent increase in the total population and amounts to an average annualized growth rate 


• As shown, population growth leveled off considerably in the 1990’s. In this ten year period, 

the population increased from 109,602 in 1990 to 112,580 in 2000; this amounts to an 

average annualized growth rate of only 0.29 percent. 

• In the five-year period from 2000 to 2005, Inglewood’s population has increased 

significantly. As shown, the population increased from 112,580 in 2000 to 118,164 in 2005, 

a net increase of 5,584. This amounts to an average annualized growth rate of 0.97 percent. 

• Only about 13.4 percent of the housing stock in the City was built from 1980 to 2000. In 

comparison, 19.2 percent of the housing stock in the County was built during this period. 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 2-1 

Population Trends: 1970-2005 

120,000 

118,164 

115,000 

110,000 

109,602 

110,900 

112,580 

105,000 

103,500 

100,000 

95,000 

89,900 

94,162 

90,000 

89,985 

85,000 

80,000 

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 

Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 

U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990 and 2000. 

2-1 Population Trends : 1970-2005 


April 20, 2006 


Population Growth from 2000 to 2005 in Inglewood and the South Bay Cities 

• Table 2-1 presents the populations for the City of Inglewood and select South Bay Cities 

in 1990, 2000, and from 2001 to 2005. The 1990 and 2000 data come from the decennial 

census while the 2005 data is provided by the California State Department of Finance. 

• Though the population of the City of Inglewood went up only slightly in the period from 

1990 to 2000 (2.7 percent), within the five year period from 2000 to 2005, the City of 

Inglewood’s population increased by 5.0 percent. Compared to other South Bay 

communities, however, Inglewood’s population growth has been quite modest. 

• The City of Inglewood’s average annual growth rate was also lower than the average of 

the South Bay Cities, 0.27 percent as compared to 0.63 percent in the period from 1990 to 

2000 and 0.97 as compared to 1.27 in the period from 2000 to 2005. 

Table 2-1 

Population Trends: 1990-2000 and 2000-2005 

1990 2000 2005 

Annualized 

Growth 

Rate 1990- 

2000 

Annualized 

Growth 

Rate 2000- 

2005 

Inglewood 109,602 112,580 118,164 0.27% 0.97% 

Carson 83,995 89,730 98,329 0.66% 1.85% 

El Segundo 15,223 16,033 17,024 0.52% 1.21% 

Gardena 49,847 57,746 61,072 1.48% 1.13% 

Hawthorne 71,349 84,112 88,790 1.66% 1.09% 

Hermosa Beach 18219 18,566 19,608 0.19% 1.10% 

Lawndale 27,331 31,711 33,458 1.50% 1.08% 

Lomita 19,382 20,046 21,153 0.34% 1.08% 

Manhattan Beach 32063 33,852 36,843 0.54% 1.71% 

Palos Verdes Estates 13512 13,340 14,208 -0.13% 1.27% 

Rancho Palos Verdes 41659 41,145 43,525 -0.12% 1.13% 

Redondo Beach 60167 63,261 67,325 0.50% 1.25% 

Rolling Hills 1871 1,871 1,983 0.00% 1.17% 

Rolling Hills Estates 7789 7,676 8,191 -0.15% 1.31% 

Torrance 133,107 137,946 147,405 0.36% 1.34% 

Total South Bay Cities 685,116 729,615 777,078 0.63% 1.27% 

Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 


California Department of Finance. 

2-1 Population Trends: 1990-2000 and 2000-2005 

2.2 Households 

The following section presents the most recent population and housing estimates for the City of 

Inglewood, the South Bay, and Los Angeles County. 


April 20, 2006 


• Table 2-2 presents the most recent demographic information available as provided by the 

California State Department of Finance. As shown, as of January 1, 2005, The City of 

Inglewood had an estimated population of 118,164. The South Bay Cities had an 

estimated population of 777,078. 



• As shown, Inglewood has an average household size of 3.22 persons per household. This 

is larger than the other South Bay Cities communities with the exceptions of Carson and 

Lawndale, which have average persons per households of 3.83 and 3.49, respectively. 

• Inglewood’s Persons per Household average has increased from 2.91 in 2000 to 3.22 in 

2005. Similar increases in average household size have occurred in both the South Bay 

Cities and Los Angeles County. 

Table 2-2 

Demographic Profile of Market Area: 2000 & 2005 

Population 

2000 

Occupied 

Units 

Persons Per 

Household 

Population 

2005 

Occupied 

Units 

Person Per 

Household 

Inglewood 112,580 38,648 2.91 118,164 36,724 3.22 

Carson 89,730 25,337 3.54 98,329 25,667 3.83 

El Segundo 16,033 7,261 2.21 17,024 7,124 2.39 

Gardena 57,746 21,041 2.74 61,072 20,437 2.99 

Hawthorne 84,112 29,629 2.84 88,790 28,630 3.10 

Hermosa Beach 18,566 9,840 1.89 19,608 9,510 2.06 

Lawndale 31,711 9,869 3.21 33,458 9,580 3.49 

Lomita 20,046 8,295 2.42 21,153 8,038 2.63 

Manhattan Beach 33,852 15,034 2.25 36,843 14,975 2.46 

Palos Verdes Estates 13,340 5,202 2.56 14,208 5,054 2.81 

Rancho Palos Verdes 41,145 15,709 2.62 43,525 15,344 2.84 

Redondo Beach 63,261 29,543 2.14 67,325 28,889 2.33 

Rolling Hills 1,871 682 2.74 1,983 650 3.05 

Rolling Hills Estates 7,676 2,880 2.67 8,191 2,847 2.88 

Torrance 137,946 55,967 2.46 147,405 55,407 2.66 

Total South Bay Cities 729,615 274,937 2.65 777,078 268,876 2.89 

Los Angeles County 9,519,330 3,270,906 2.91 10,226,506 3,201,352 3.19 


California State Department of Finance, January 1, 2005. 

2-2 Demographic Profile of Market Area: 2000-2005 

2.3 Tenure 

• As shown in Table 2-3, in both 1990 and 2000, about 36 percent of Inglewood’s population 

owned their housing unit while about 64 percent rented their place of residence. 

• Los Angeles County as a whole had a higher home ownership rate. As shown, in both 1990 

and 2000 about 48 percent of those living in Los Angeles County owned their housing unit 

while 52 percent rented their place of residence. 


April 20, 2006 


Table 2-3 

Housing Tenure: 1990-2000 

1990 

Percent 

Distribution 2000 

Percent 

Distribution 

Change 


Owner Occupied 13,110 36.3% 13,396 36.4% 2.2% 

Renter Occupied 22,992 63.7% 23,421 63.6% 1.9% 

Total 36,102 100.0% 36,817 100.0% 2.0% 


Owner Occupied 1,440,864 48.2% 1,499,694 47.9% 4.1% 

Renter Occupied 1,548,688 51.8% 1,634,080 52.1% 5.5% 

Total 2,989,552 100.0% 3,133,774 100.0% 4.8% 



2-3 Housing Tenure: 1990-2000 

Figure 2-2 

Housing Tenure: Occupied Housing Units in 2000 

70.0% 

63.6% 

60.0% 

50.0% 

47.9% 

52.1% 

40.0% 

36.4% 

30.0% 

20.0% 

10.0% 

0.0% 


Owner Occupied 


Renter Occupied 



2-2 Housing Tenure: Occupied Housing Units in 2000 


April 20, 2006 


2.4 Housing Units 

Distribution by Type 

• As shown in 2-4, the City of Inglewood’s housing stock remained relatively constant, 

actually decreasing slightly from 38,713 in 1990 to 38,639 in 2000 as reported by the 

U.S. Census. 

• As shown in Table 2-4, single-family units comprised 44.4 percent of the dwelling units 

in the City in 2000. In comparison, Los Angeles County had 55.0 percent singly-family 

units in 2000. 

• In 2000, 55.0 percent of the housing stock in the City was comprised of multi-family 

units, compared to 43.3 percent in Los Angeles County. 

• Mobile Homes and other non-standard housing structures comprised only 0.6 percent of 

the total housing stock in the City in the year 2000. In comparison, in Los Angeles 

County these housing types comprised 1.7 percent of the total housing stock in the year 

2000. 

Table 2-4 

Dwelling Units: 1990-2000 

1990 

Percent 


Percent 

Distribution 

Change 


Single Family 16,629 43.0% 17,139 44.4% 3.1% 

Multi-Family 21,456 55.4% 21,262 55.0% -0.9% 

Mobile Homes/ Other 628 1.6% 238 0.6% -62.1% 

Total 38,713 100.0% 38,639 100.0% -0.2% 


Single Family 1,745,645 55.2% 1,800,905 55.0% 3.2% 

Multi-Family 1,361,936 43.1% 1,415,474 43.3% 3.9% 

Mobile Homes/ Other 55,729 1.8% 55,790 1.7% 0.1% 

Total 3,163,310 100.0% 3,272,169 100.0% 3.4% 



2-4 Dwelling Units: 1990-2000 


April 20, 2006 


Age of Housing Stock 

• As shown in Table 2-5 and Figure 2-3, the housing stock in the City of Inglewood is 

relatively older than that of Los Angeles County. 

• Only about 13.4 percent of the housing stock in the City was built from 1980 to 2000. In 

comparison, 19.2 percent of the housing stock in the County was built during this period. 

Table 2-5 


No. of 

Units 

% of Total 


Built 1990 to 2000 1,588 4.1% 

Built 1980 to 1989 3,576 9.3% 

Built 1970 to 1979 5,624 14.6% 

Built 1960 to 1969 8,475 21.9% 

Built 1950 to 1959 9,042 23.4% 

Built 1940 to 1949 5,907 15.3% 

Built 1939 or earlier 4,427 11.5% 

Total Units 38,639 100.0% 

Percent built since 1980 13.4% 


Built 1990 to 2000 224,060 6.9% 

Built 1980 to 1989 403,184 12.3% 

Built 1970 to 1979 509,695 15.6% 

Built 1960 to 1969 583,178 17.8% 

Built 1950 to 1959 728,336 22.3% 

Built 1940 to 1949 400,671 12.2% 

Built 1939 or earlier 421,785 12.9% 

Total Units 3,270,909 100.0% 

Percent built since 1980 19.2% 


U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. 

2-5 Age of Housing Stock 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 2-3 


Before 1939, 

11.5% 


1980-2000, 

13.4% 

1940-1959, 

38.7% 

1960-1979, 

36.5% 


Before 1939, 

12.9% 

1980-2000, 

19.2% 

1940-1959, 

34.5% 

1960-1979, 

33.4% 


U.S. Bureau of the Census 1990 and 2000. 

2-3 Age of Housing Stock 


April 20, 2006 


2.5 Overcrowding 

• Overcrowding is defined as more than 1.0 occupant per room. A housing unit with 

more than 1.5 occupants per room is considered to be severely overcrowded. 

• Overcrowding increased significantly between 1990 and 2000 in both the City of 

Inglewood and Los Angeles County. 

• As shown in Table 2-6, about 27.9 percent of the housing units in the City of 

Inglewood were overcrowded in 2000, a 5 percentage point increase from the 22.9 

percent in 1990. In comparison, in the year 2000, 23.0 percent of the housing units 

were overcrowded in Los Angeles County as a whole, up from 18.6 percent in 1990. 

• Severe overcrowding, as defined as 1.51 or more occupants per room, also increased 

significantly between 1990 and 2000 in both Inglewood and Los Angeles County. As 

shown in Table 2-6, there was a 28.1 percent increase in the number of severely 

overcrowded housing units in Inglewood and a 35.3 percent increase in Los Angeles 

County. 

• Overcrowded units are a reflection of the increasing population growth without a 

relative increase in the number of housing units to meet this need. Additionally, 

overcrowding indicates there may be a lack of housing that is suitable or affordable. 

Table 2-6 

Overcrowding 

1990 2000 Change % Change 


1.00 or less occupants per room 27,841 26,546 (1,295) -4.7% 

1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room 2,871 3,366 495 17.2% 


Total Units 36,102 36,817 715 2.0% 



1.00 or less occupants per room 2,433,804 2,413,405 (20,399) -0.8% 

1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room 207,528 249,094 41,566 20.0% 


Total Units 2,989,552 3,133,774 144,222 4.8% 


1. More than 1.0 occupant per room is defined as an overcrowded condition. 



2-6 Overcrowding 


April 20, 2006 


2.6 Race and Ethnicity 

• As shown in Table 2-7 and Figure 2-4, the City’s racial composition is markedly different 

from that of Los Angeles County as whole. In 2000, the non-Hispanic White population 

comprised only 4.1 percent of Inglewood’s population, compared with 31.1 percent in the 

County. 

• In addition, the Black population in Inglewood is much greater than that of the County; 

46.4 percent of Inglewood’s population is Black as compared to just 9.5 percent of the 


• Also, while Asians makeup 11.8 percent of the County’s population, they makeup just 

1.1 percent of the City of Inglewood’s population. 

• Persons of Hispanic origin are relatively equally represented in both the City and County. 

The City of Inglewood’s population is 46.0 percent Hispanic while Los Angeles County 

is 44.6 percent Hispanic. 

Table 2-7 

Population by Race and Ethnicity: 2000 

Race Inglewood % of Total 

Los Angeles 

County % of Total 

Non-Hispanic White 4,628 4.1% 2,959,614 31.1% 

Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 51,829 46.0% 4,242,213 44.6% 

African American 52,260 46.4% 901,472 9.5% 

Asian 1,217 1.1% 1,124,569 11.8% 

Other 1 802 0.7% 68,809 0.7% 

Two or More Races 2 1,844 1.6% 222,661 2.3% 

Total 112,580 100.0% 9,519,338 100.0% 

1. "Other" category includes American Indian, Alaska Native alone, Native Hawaiian 

and Other Pacific Islander alone, and some other race alon as classified in the 

2000 census. 

2. The new Classification system in the 2000 Census includes an additional category 

for origin of two or more race. 


U.S. Census Bureau, 2000, P8 Hispanic or Latino by Race 

2-7 Population by Race and Ethnicity: 2000 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 2-4 

Race and Ethnicity: 2000 


Other, 0.7% 

Two or More 

Races, 1.6% 

Non-Hispanic 

Asian, 1.1% 

White, 4.1% 


46.4% 



46.0% 


Other, 0.7% 

Two or More 

Races, 2.3% 


9.5% 

Asian, 11.8% 

Non-Hispanic 

White, 31.1% 



44.6% 


U.S. Bureau of the Census 1990 and 2000. 

2-4 Race and Ethnicity: 2000 


April 20, 2006 


2.7 Age Distribution of Population 

• As shown in Table 2-8 and Figure 2-5, in both Inglewood and Los Angeles County, the 

age group 35 to 64 is the largest portion of the population. This broad age group is 

considered to be the most experienced segment of the labor force. 

• As shown, in both Inglewood and Los Angeles County, those under age 18 are continuing 

to become an even larger segment of the population. This group consists primarily of 

minors who are not of working age. With increased childhood populations, growing 

needs for more children and youth services will continue. 



• With respect to those 65 years and over, the proportion of the population in this age 

group has remained relatively constant in both the City of Inglewood and Los Angeles 


Table 2-8 

Age Distribution: 1990 and 2000 

1990 

Percent 


Percent 

Distribution 


Under 18 Years 32,998 30.1% 36,437 32.4% 

18 to 34 Years 36,513 33.3% 29,929 26.6% 

35 to 64 Years 32,597 29.7% 38,236 34.0% 

65 Years & Over 7,494 6.8% 7,978 7.1% 

Total 109,602 100.0% 112,580 100.0% 



Under 18 2,326,110 26.2% 2,667,976 28.0% 

18 to 34 2,846,835 32.1% 2,562,379 26.9% 

35 to 64 2,829,632 31.9% 3,362,310 35.3% 

65 and over 860,587 9.7% 926,673 9.7% 

Total 8,863,164 100.0% 9,519,338 100.0% 




2-8 Age Distribution: 1990 and 2000 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 2-5 

Age Distributions in Inglewood and Los Angeles County 


40.0% 

35.0% 

30.0% 

32.4% 

30.1% 

33.3% 

26.6% 

29.7% 

34.0% 

25.0% 

20.0% 

1990 

2000 

15.0% 

10.0% 

5.0% 

6.8% 

7.1% 

0.0% 


Over 


40.0% 

35.0% 

30.0% 

25.0% 

28.0% 

26.2% 

32.1% 

26.9% 

31.9% 

35.3% 

20.0% 

1990 

2000 

15.0% 

10.0% 

9.7% 

9.7% 

5.0% 

0.0% 


Over 

2-5 Age Distribution in Inglewood and Los Angeles County 


April 20, 2006 


2.8 Educational Attainment 

• As shown in Table 2-9 and Figure 2-6, the City’s population age 25 years and older has 

achieved markedly lower levels of higher education than those for the South Bay Cities 

and Los Angeles County. 

• In 2000, about 20.4 percent of the population age 25 years and older in Inglewood had 

received an Associate Arts or higher college degree, compared to 31.9 percent in the 

South Bay and 31.1 percent in the County. 

• About 26.3 percent of the adult population in Inglewood had not achieved a high school 

diploma, compared to 31.2 percent in the South Bay and 30.0 percent in the County. 

• This suggests that while a larger proportion of the Inglewood population aged 25 and 

older has graduated high school than in the South Bay Cities and Los Angeles County, 

that fewer members of the population have achieved degrees beyond that of a high school 

diploma or equivalency. This has strong implications for the future skills and training 

requirements of the labor force of Inglewood. 

Table 2-9 

Educational Attainment of Population 25 years and older: 2000 

South 

Bay 

Cities 

Los 

Angeles 

County 

Highest level of Education Attained Inglewood % of Total 



Less than 9th grade 12,073 18.7% 45,803 7.8% 955,932 16.2% 

Less than 12th grade, no diploma 11,346 17.6% 138,181 23.4% 814,592 13.8% 

High school graduate (includes equivalency) 12,979 20.1% 120,950 20.5% 1,108,314 18.8% 

Some college, no degree 15,021 23.3% 96,826 16.4% 1,174,477 20.0% 

Associate degree 4,562 7.1% 23,040 3.9% 367,244 6.2% 

Bachelor's degree 5,536 8.6% 147,777 25.0% 945,634 16.1% 

Post-graduate degree 3,072 4.8% 17,547 3.0% 516,755 8.8% 

Total 64,589 100.0% 590,124 100.0% 5,882,948 100.0% 

Associate degree or higher 13,170 20.4% 188,364 31.9% 1,829,633 31.1% 


U.S. Census Bureau, 2000, P37. 

2-9 Educational Attainment of Population 25 years and older: 2000 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 2-6 

AA Degree and Above in City of Inglewood, South Bay Cities, and L.A County: 2000 

90.0% 

80.0% 

70.0% 

79.6% 

68.1% 

68.9% 

60.0% 

50.0% 

40.0% 

30.0% 

20.0% 

10.0% 

20.4% 

31.9% 31.1% 

0.0% 

Below AA 

AA or Higher 




2-6 AA Degree and Above in City of Inglewood, South Bay Cities and L.A. County: 2000 


April 20, 2006 


2.9 Labor Force 

Distribution by Type of Job 

• As shown in Table 2-10, sales and office occupations are the largest category of the labor 

force in the City of Inglewood at 30.7 percent. This is slightly higher than Los Angeles 

County, which has 27.6 percent of the labor force employed in sales and office 

occupations. 

• The Management and Professional occupations comprised 24.6 percent of Inglewood’s 

labor force while 34.3 percent of Los Angeles County’s labor force fell into this category. 

• Within Inglewood, 20.5 percent of the labor force is employed in service occupations 

compared with 14.7 percent for Los Angeles County. 

• Production and Construction related occupations employ nearly identical proportions of 

Inglewood’s and Los Angeles County’s labor forces. 

Table 2-10 

Labor Force: 1990 to 2000 


2000 % of Total 

Management and Professional 10,425 24.6% 

Service 8,707 20.5% 

Sales and Office 13,027 30.7% 

Farming, fishing, and Forestry 84 0.2% 

Construction, Extraction, and Maintenance 3,216 7.6% 

Production, Transportation, and Material mov 6,916 16.3% 

Total 42,375 100.0% 


Management and Professional 1,355,973 34.3% 

Service 580,809 14.7% 

Sales and Office 1,090,059 27.6% 

Farming, fishing, and Forestry 6,650 0.2% 

Construction, Extraction, and Maintenance 306,450 7.8% 

Production, Transportation, and Material mov 613,474 15.5% 

Total 3,953,415 100.0% 

2-10 Labor Force: 1990 to 2000 




April 20, 2006 


Comparative Unemployment Rates 

• Table 2-11 and Figure 2-7 shows the unemployment rates for the City of Inglewood in 

comparison to cities in the South Bay with populations over 25,000, and Los Angeles 

County. These cities include Carson, Gardena, Hawthorne, Lawndale, Manhattan Beach, 

Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, and Torrance. 

• As shown, in 2004, the unemployment rate in Inglewood was the second highest among 

the South Bay Cities at 8.3 percent, compared to 6.6 percent for Los Angeles County. 

• Amongst the South Bay Cities with populations over 25,000, Hawthorne had the highest 

rate of unemployment at 8.7. In contrast, Manhattan Beach and Rancho Palos Verdes 

had the lowest rates of unemployment with 2.2 percent each. 

• Between 1994 and 2004, all of the South Bay Cities shown had substantial decreases in 

unemployment rates with the exception of Hawthorne, which remained constant. 

• Between 1994 and 2004, Inglewood’s unemployment rate dropped by 50.6 percent from 

12.5 percent in 1994 to 8.3 percent in 2004. 

Table 2-11 

Comparative Unemployment Rates: 1994 and 2004 

Jurisdictions 1994 2004 

1994-2004 

Percent 

Change 


Inglewood 12.5% 8.3% -50.6% 

Carson 9.1% 6.6% -37.9% 

Gardena 7.5% 6.1% -23.0% 

Hawthorne 8.7% 8.7% 0.0% 

Lawndale 9.5% 6.5% -46.2% 

Manhattan Beach 3.0% 2.2% -36.4% 

Rancho Palos Verdes 3.0% 2.2% -36.4% 

Redondo Beach 4.3% 3.4% -26.5% 

Torrance 5.0% 3.2% -56.3% 

Los Angeles County 9.3% 6.6% -40.9% 


Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

2-11 Comparative Unemployment Rates: 1994 and 2004 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 2-7 

Comparative Unemployment Rates: 2004 

10.0% 

9.0% 

8.0% 

7.0% 

6.0% 

5.0% 

8.7% 

8.3% 

6.6% 

6.5% 

6.1% 

6.6% 

4.0% 

3.0% 

2.0% 

3.4% 

3.2% 

2.2% 

2.2% 

1.0% 

0.0% 

Hawthorne 


Carson 

Lawndale 

Gardena 

Redondo Beach 

Torrance 

Manhattan Beach 

Rancho Palos Verdes 



Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

2-7 Comparative Unemployment Rates: 2004 


April 20, 2006 


2.10 Household Income 

• As shown in Table 2-11, in 2000 about 68.4 percent of Inglewood households earned 

below $50,000, compared with 47.7 percent in the South Bay. In Los Angeles County, an 

estimated 56.9 percent of households earned below $50,000. 

• As shown in Table 2-12 and Figure 2-8, the average household income in nominal dollars 

for the City was $44,656 in 2000, significantly lower than the South Bay and the County. 


$54,732 in 2000, much lower than the average household incomes of the South Bay cities 

and the County. 

• As shown in constant 2006 dollars, the average household income in the City remained 

relatively flat, actually declining slightly, from 1990 to 2000, compared to the South Bay 

and Los Angeles County where average household incomes grew by about 4.3 and 3.2 

percent, respectively. 

Table 2-11 

Distribution of Income: 1990-2000 

(in nominal dollars) 

1990 % of Total 2000 % of Total 

1990-2000 % 

Change in 

Households 


Less than $10,000 5,282 14.5% 5,162 14.0% -2.3% 

$10,000-24,999 9,578 26.3% 8,048 21.8% -16.0% 

$25,000-$49,999 13,108 36.0% 11,992 32.6% -8.5% 

$50,000-$99,999 7,539 20.7% 9,127 24.8% 21.1% 

$100,000+ 892 2.5% 2,505 6.8% 180.8% 

Total 36,399 100.0% 36,834 100.0% 1.2% 


Less than $10,000 21,524 8.4% 19,771 7.4% -8.1% 

$10,000-24,999 44,745 17.5% 39,309 14.8% -12.1% 

$25,000-$49,999 79,862 31.2% 67,618 25.4% -15.3% 

$50,000-$99,999 80,212 31.4% 83,204 31.3% 3.7% 

$100,000+ 29,218 11.4% 55,882 21.0% 91.3% 

Total 255,561 100.0% 265,784 100.0% 4.0% 


Less than $10,000 383,060 12.8% 330,000 10.5% -13.9% 

$10,000-24,999 680,398 22.7% 602,111 19.2% -11.5% 

$25,000-$49,999 953,229 31.8% 853,372 27.2% -10.5% 

$50,000-$99,999 742,333 24.8% 877,071 28.0% 18.2% 

$100,000+ 235,323 7.9% 473,725 15.1% 101.3% 

Total 2,994,343 100.0% 3,136,279 100.0% 4.7% 


U.S. Census Data, 1990 and 2000. 

2-11 Distribution of Income: 1990-2000 


April 20, 2006 


Table 2-12 

Average Household Income 

(in nominal dollars) 

Description 1990 2000 % Change 

Inglewood $35,433 $44,656 26.0% 

South Bay Cities $55,614 $73,477 32.1% 


(in constant 2006 dollars) 

Description 1990 2000 % Change 

Inglewood $55,033 $54,732 -0.5% 

South Bay Cities $86,377 $90,056 4.3% 


2-12 Average Household Income 

$100,000 


U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000. 

Figure 2-8 

Average Annual Household Income: 1990-2000 

(In constant 2006 dollars) 

$90,000 

$86,377 

$90,056 

$80,000 

$70,000 

$73,390 

$75,758 

$60,000 

$50,000 

$55,033 

$54,732 

$40,000 

$30,000 




2-8 Average Annual Household Income: 1990-2000 

1990 2000 


April 20, 2006 


2.11 Projected Population, Household and Employment Growth 


• As shown in Table 2-13 and Figure 2-9, projections provide by the Southern California 

Association of Governments; (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) 2004 suggest 

that the City of Inglewood will experience modest growth in population, households, and 

employment over the period 2000-2030. 

• As shown, population is projected to grow from 112,580 in 2000 (U.S. Census estimates) 

to 133,072 in 2030, representing an annual average growth rate of 0.56 percent. 

• Households are expected to grow slightly faster than population at an annual rate of 

about 0.66 percent. 

• Employment in Inglewood is projected to increase by only nearly 4,100 jobs, according 

preliminary corrections being made to SCAG RTP 2004. 

• Employment is projected to increase from about 32,900 jobs in 2000 to an estimated 

37,000 by the year 2030. At an average annual rate of 0.39 percent. 

• As a result of the faster population growth relative to employment growth, the jobshousing 

ratio in Inglewood of 0.89 in 2000 is expected to decrease slightly to 0.83 in 

2030. 


• As shown in Table 2-13, projections for the South Bay Cities are shown to provide a 

demographic picture of an area more relevant to Inglewood than Los Angeles County. 

• The South Bay Cities’ population and households are projected to increase at relatively 

similar average annual rates to the City of Inglewood, 0.65 percent and 0.54 percent, 

respectively. 

• Employment is projected to increase at an annual rate of about 0.78 percent and the 

number of jobs per household is expected to increase from 1.48 in 2000 to 1.59 in 2030. 

• It is important to note that the jobs per household ratio for the South Bay Cities is, in 

2000, appreciably higher than that of Inglewood. In addition, the ratio is projected to 

continue widening from 2000 to 2030, while Inglewood is expected to increase slightly 

to 1.38 in 2030. 


• The County is projected to grow more rapidly than both Inglewood and the South Bay 

Cities as a whole over this time period, increasing in population at an average annual rate 

of 0.80 percent, and number of households increasing at an annual rate of 0.91 percent. 

• The County’s employment is project to increase at an average rate of 0.80 percent 

annually, about the same as population growth. However, since the number of 

households is growing more rapidly than employment, the jobs to household ratio is 

excepted to decline marginally over this projection period. 


April 20, 2006 


Table 2-13 

Population, Households and Employment Projections: 2000 to 2030 1 

2000-2030 

Average 

Numerical Annual Percent 

Jurisdiction 2000 2030 Change Change Change 


Population 112,580 133,072 20,492 0.56% 18.2% 

Households 36,834 44,812 7,978 0.66% 21.7% 

Employment 2 32,900 37,000 4,100 0.39% 12.5% 


South Bay Cities 2 

Population 729,615 886,020 156,405 0.65% 21.4% 

Households 265,784 311,966 46,182 0.54% 17.4% 

Employment 394,200 497,491 103,291 0.78% 26.2% 

Jobs/Household Ratio 1.48 1.59 0.11 0.24% 7.5% 


Population 9,519,330 12,096,899 2,577,569 0.80% 27.1% 

Households 3,108,889 4,083,459 974,570 0.91% 31.3% 

Employment 4,431,307 5,633,695 1,202,388 0.80% 27.1% 


Notes: 

1. All estimates for employment estimates and projections are based on SCAG RTP 2004 projections. 

Population and household estimates for the year 2000 are from the U.S. Census 2000. 

2. Preliminary estimates of revision to the SCAG RTP 2004 as provided by SCAG staff in April, 2006. 

3. The South Bay Cities includes the Cities of Carson, El Segundo, Gardena, Hawthorne, 

Hermosa Beach, Inglewood, Lawndale, Lomita, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Estates, Rancho 

Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, and Torrance. 


Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), RTP 2004. 

U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000. 

2-13 Population, Households and Employment: Projections 2000-2030 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 2-9 

Projected Population and Employment Growth: Percent Change 2000 to 2030 1 

40.0% 

Percent Change: 2000 to 2030 

35.0% 

30.0% 

25.0% 

20.0% 

15.0% 

10.0% 

5.0% 

0.0% 

26.2% 

27.1% 27.1% 

21.4% 

18.2% 

12.5% 

Inglewood South Bay Los Angeles County 

Population 

Employment 


Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), RTP 2004. 


2-9 Projected Population and Employment Growth: Percent Change 2000 to 2030 


April 20, 2006 


Chapter 3 – BUSINESS OVERVIEW 

Employment data for the City of Inglewood and Los Angeles County from 1994 to 2004 was 

provided by the California Economic Development Department (EDD). This information 

categorizes employment and payroll data by industry sector. Employment data is grouped by the 

North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) from 2001 to 2004, and the Standard 

Industrial Classification (SIC) for 1994. The North American Industry Classification System was 

developed by representatives from the United States, Canada, and Mexico, and replaces each 

country's separate classification system with one uniform system for classifying industries. In the 

United States, NAICS replaces the SIC, a system that federal, state, and local governments, the 

business community, and the general public have used since the 1930s. 

Almost 70.0 percent of the jobs in Inglewood were in three sectors; Retail & Entertainment; 

Health Care and Other Services; and Government and Local Services. In contrast, Manufacturing 

and Transportation only represent about 9.0 percent of the jobs. 

3.1 Overall 1994 to 2004 Employment Trends 

• As shown in Table 3-1, the City’s total employment (including self-employment) grew 

marginally from 30,886 in 1994 to 31,127 in 2004, at an annual average growth rate of 

0.1 percent. 

• In 2004, services formed the largest employment sector in the City with nearly 32 percent 

of the total jobs, as shown in Figure 3-2. 

• Employment in services grew by a total of 1.0 percent from 9,814 in 1994 to 9,914 in 

2004, at annual average rate of 0.1 percent. 

• Manufacturing and Retail jobs declined by about 36 percent and 31 percent, respectively, 

over the1994 to 2004 time period. 

• Wholesale Trade, Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (FIRE), and Construction declined 

in the 8 percent to 13 percent range from 1994 to 2004, as shown in Table 3-1. 

3.2 NAICS Sectoral Employment and Salary Trends: 2001 to 2004 

The following section presents sectoral trends by NAICS categories from 2001 to 2004 based on 

data provided by the California Employment Development Department (EDD). The data 

provided included information on employment by sector, number of establishments per sector 

and payroll and wage trends by sector. 


April 20, 2006 


Table 3-1 


Employment by Sector: 1994 to 2004 1 

Sectors 2 1994 2004 

Percent 

Change 

Annual 

Average 

Growth Rate 

Construction 627 578 -7.8% -0.8% 

Farming, Fishing, Forestry, Mining 82 30 -63.4% -9.6% 

FIRE 1,326 1,201 -9.4% -1.0% 

Government 5,429 4,977 -8.3% -0.9% 

Manufacturing 2,867 1,829 -36.2% -4.4% 

Retail 4,300 2,957 -31.2% -3.7% 

Services 9,814 9,914 1.0% 0.1% 

Wholesale 1,619 1,410 -12.9% -1.4% 

Other 3 4,823 8,321 72.5% 5.6% 

TOTAL 30,886 31,217 1.1% 0.1% 

1. Based on SIC for 1994 and NAICS for 2004, as shown in Appendix Table 1. 

2. Includes estimates for self-employment by sectoral rates as shown in Appendix Table 2. 

3. Other includes Transportation, Utilities, Warehousing, Non-classified and suppressed data. 



3-1 Total Employment: 1994-2004 

Figure 3-1 


Comparative Employment Distribution by Sector: 1994 to 2004 

35.0% 

31.8% 31.8% 

30.0% 

25.0% 

1994 2004 

20.0% 

17.6% 

15.0% 

15.9% 

13.9% 

10.0% 

9.5% 

9.3% 

5.0% 

0.0% 

5.9% 

Services Government Retail Manufacturing Wholesale FIRE Construction Farming, 

Fishing, 

Forestry, 

Mining 

5.2% 

4.5% 

4.3% 

3.8% 

2.0% 

1.9% 

0.3% 

0.1% 

3-1 Employment by Major Employment Categories: 2004 


April 20, 2006 


Employment by NAICS 2001 -2004 

• Employment data from EDD was adjusted to include estimated self-employment by 

NAICS sectors using factors shown in Appendix Table A-2. 

• The adjusted employment distribution including self-employment from 2001 to 2004 is 

shown in Table 3-2. 

• As shown in Table 3-2, total employment including declined by 6.2 percent from 33,298 

in 2001 to 31,217 in 2004, at an annual average rate of 2.1 percent. 

• Employment declined in all major non-Public Sector categories except Services, Retail, 

and Construction. 

• Service sector employment grew by 5.4 percent from 9,402 in 2001 to 9,914 in 2004, 

whereas employment in the Retail sector grew by 2.9 percent from 2,873 in 2001 to 2,957 

in 2004. 

Table 3-2 


Employment by Sector: 2001 to 2004 1 

Industrial Categories 2001 2002 2003 2004 

2001 to 2004 

Percent 

Change 

2001 to 2004 

Annual 

Average 

Growth Rate 

Professional, Scientific and Technical 759 674 418 411 -45.8% -18.5% 

Finance and Real Estate 1,772 1,475 1,406 1,201 -32.2% -12.2% 

Information 295 282 237 259 -12.2% -4.3% 

Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 3,079 2,693 2,590 2,712 -11.9% -4.1% 

Services 9,402 10,347 9,734 9,914 5.4% 1.8% 

Manufacturing 2,685 2,487 2,244 1,829 -31.9% -12.0% 

Retail 2,873 2,762 2,884 2,957 2.9% 1.0% 

Wholesale 1,449 1,408 1,437 1,410 -2.7% -0.9% 

Government 4,651 5,181 5,079 4,977 7.0% 2.3% 

Construction 454 445 523 578 27.4% 8.4% 

Transportation Warehousing 4,099 3,445 3,227 3,344 -18.4% -6.6% 

Other 1,780 2,045 1,788 1,626 -8.6% -3.0% 

Total 33,298 33,246 31,565 31,217 -6.2% -2.1% 

SERVICES 

Accomodation and Food Services 1,963 2,007 2,134 2,209 12.5% 4.0% 

Admin Support, Waste Mgmt 1,203 924 737 998 -17.0% -6.0% 

Educational Services 345 374 374 373 8.0% 2.6% 

Health Care and Social Services 4,385 5,588 4,974 4,930 12.4% 4.0% 

Other Services 1,506 1,454 1,514 1,404 -6.7% -2.3% 

Sub-total 9,402 10,347 9,734 9,914 5.4% 1.8% 

1. Includes estimates for self-employment by sector not originally provided in the California Employment Development Department. 



3-2 Employment by Sector: 2001-2004 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 3-2 


Service Sector Categories as Percent of Service Sector Employment: 2004 

60.0% 

50.0% 

49.7% 

40.0% 

30.0% 

22.3% 

20.0% 

14.2% 

10.0% 

10.1% 

3.8% 

0.0% 


Services 


Food Services 



Mgmt 

Educational Services 



3-2 Service Sector Categories as Percent of Total Service Sector Employment: 2004 

• Manufacturing declined by 31.9 percent from an estimated 2,685 jobs in 2001 to 1829 

jobs in 2004. 

• Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (FIRE) declined by 32.2 percent and Professional and 

Technical Services declined by 45.8 percent. 

• Of the service sector categories, as shown in Table 3-2, Accommodation and Food 

Services, and Health Care and Social Services each grew by 12.5 percent each from 2001 

to 2004, at annual average growth rates of 4.0 percent. 

• As shown in Figure 3-2, in 2004 Health Care and Social Services comprised nearly 50 

percent of Services-related employment followed by Accommodation and Food Services 

at 22.3 percent. 

Wage and Salary Trends 2001 -2004 

• Table 3-3 shows payroll data, in Constant 2005 dollars, for the City of Inglewood from 

the EDD for the 2001 to 2004. 


April 20, 2006 


Table 3-3 


Number of Establishments, Employment and Wages: 2001-2004 

2001 2004 

Establishments Employment 

Annual Average Salary (Constant 2005) 

Percent 

Change 

Average 

Growth Rate 2001 2004 

Percent 

Change 2001 2004 

Percent 

Change 

Professional, Scientific and Technical 65 67 3.08% 1.02% 602 326 -45.85% $38,180 $32,634 -14.5% 

Finance and Real Estate 122 120 -1.64% -0.55% 1,571 1,045 -33.48% $71,335 $41,209 -42.2% 

Information 15 19 26.67% 8.20% 278 244 -12.23% $77,008 $55,288 -28.2% 

Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 27 31 14.81% 4.71% 2,433 2,143 -11.92% $66,194 $81,424 23.0% 

Services 720 760 5.56% 1.82% 8,694 9,188 5.68% $29,159 $31,954 9.6% 

Manufacturing 90 76 -15.56% -5.48% 2,616 1,782 -31.88% $41,924 $44,153 5.3% 

Retail 267 265 -0.75% -0.25% 2,873 2,957 2.92% $27,935 $24,062 -13.9% 

Wholesale 87 97 11.49% 3.69% 1,363 1,326 -2.71% $42,295 $36,102 -14.6% 

Government 11 13 18.18% 5.73% 4,618 4,916 6.44% $46,999 $47,253 0.5% 

Construction 55 62 12.73% 4.07% 369 470 27.37% $36,049 $32,115 -10.9% 

Transportation Warehousing 304 328 7.89% 2.57% 3,913 3,192 -18.43% $39,277 $42,526 8.3% 

Other 12 15 32.61% 9.86% 1,138 975 -14.28% $85,990 $49,761 -42.1% 

Total 1,775 1,853 4.44% 1.46% 30,468 28,564 -6.25% $42,683 $40,773 -4.5% 

SERVICES 

Accomodation and Food Services 143 160 11.89% 3.82% 1,868 2,102 12.53% $15,281 $14,549 -4.8% 

Admin Support, Waste Mgmt 73 75 2.74% 0.91% 1,010 838 -17.03% $24,565 $24,873 1.3% 

Educational Services 17 24 41.18% 12.18% 339 366 7.96% $37,176 $38,873 4.6% 

Health Care and Social Services 299 316 5.69% 1.86% 4,039 4,541 12.43% $44,103 $42,627 -3.3% 

Other Services 188 185 -1.60% -0.53% 1,438 1,341 -6.75% $23,803 $25,630 7.7% 

Sub-total 720 760 5.56% 1.82% 8,694 9,188 9.15% $32,013 $31,954 -0.2% 


California Employment Development Department (EDD). 

3-3 Number of Establishments, Employment and Wages: 2001-2004 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 3-3 


Average Annual Salary in 8 Largest Employment Sectors: 2004 


$90,000 

$80,000 

$81,424 

$70,000 

$60,000 

$50,000 

$40,000 

$47,253 

$44,153 

$42,526 

$41,209 $40,773 

$36,102 

$31,954 

$30,000 

$24,062 

$20,000 

$10,000 

$0 

Arts, 

Ente r tainm e nt 

and Recreation 

Government Manufacturing Transportation 

Warehousing 

Finance and 

Real Estate 

Average City 

Wage 

Wholesale Services Retail 


California Employment Development Department. 

3-3 Average Annual Salary in 8 Largest Employment Sectors: 2004 

• According to the EDD, the City of Inglewood had 1,853 establishments with 28,564 

employees in 2004. 

• As shown in Table 3-3, the annual average salary in the City of Inglewood declined by 

4.5 percent in constant 2005 dollars from $42,683 to $40,773 from 2001 to 2004. 

• As shown in Figure 3-3, in 2004, Arts, Entertainment and Recreation jobs had the highest 

average salary of $81,424, followed by Government and Manufacturing jobs at $47,253 

and $44,159, respectively. 

• As shown in Figure 3-3, average salaries in the Wholesale, Services and Retail sectors are 

below the City average salaries of $40,733. These sectors comprised nearly 47 percent of 

the total employment in the City in 2004. 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 3-4 


Average Annual Salary in Service Sector Industries: 2004 


$45,000 

$40,000 

$42,627 

$38,873 

$35,000 

$30,000 

$25,000 

$25,630 

$24,873 

$20,000 

$15,000 

$14,549 

$10,000 

$5,000 

$0 



Educational Services Other Services Admin Support, 

Waste Mgmt 


Food Services 



3-4 Average Annual Salary for Service Sector Industries: 2004 

• As shown in Figure 3-4, amongst the Services-related jobs, average salary in Health Care 

and Social Services was the highest at $42,627-- slightly higher than the City average. 

Average salary in the Accommodation and Food Services sector was the lowest at 

$14,549. 

3.3 Distribution of Establishments by Sector and Size: 2001 to 2004 

• As shown in Table 3-4, the number of establishments in the City grew marginally by 4.4 

percent between 2001 and 2004 from 1,775 in 2001 to 1,853 in 2004. 

• Services-related establishments grew by 5.56 percent from 720 in 2001 to 760 in 2004. 

• Manufacturing establishments declined by 15.5 percent from 90 in 2001 to 76 in 2004. 


April 20, 2006 


Table 3-4 


Distribution of Establishments by Sectors: 2001 to 2004 1 

Average Establishment Size 

(Employees) 


2001 2004 

Percent 

Change 2001 2004 

Percent 

Change 

Professional, Scientific and Technical 65 67 3.08% 9 5 -47.5% 

Finance and Real Estate 122 120 -1.64% 13 9 -32.4% 

Information 15 19 26.67% 19 13 -30.7% 

Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 27 31 14.81% 90 69 -23.3% 

Services 720 760 5.56% 12 12 0.1% 

Manufacturing 90 76 -15.56% 29 23 -19.3% 

Retail 267 265 -0.75% 11 11 3.7% 

Wholesale 87 97 11.49% 16 14 -12.7% 

Government 11 13 18.18% 420 378 -9.9% 

Construction 55 62 12.73% 7 8 13.0% 

Transportation Warehousing 304 328 7.89% 13 10 -24.4% 

Other 12 15 32.61% 99 64 -35.4% 

Total 1,775 1,853 4.44% 17 15 -10.2% 

SERVICES 

Accomodation and Food Services 143 160 11.89% 13 13 0.6% 

Admin Support, Waste Mgmt 73 75 2.74% 14 11 -19.2% 

Educational Services 17 24 41.18% 20 15 -23.5% 

Health Care and Social Services 299 316 5.69% 14 14 6.4% 

Other Services 188 185 -1.60% 8 7 -5.2% 

Sub-total 720 760 5.56% 12 12 0.1% 



3-4 Distribution of Establishments by Sectors: 2001 to 2004 

Figure 3 -4 


Distribution of Establishments by Sectors: 2004 

20.0% 

18.0% 

17.7% 

17.1% 

16.0% 

14.0% 

14.3% 

12.0% 

10.0% 

8.6% 

8.0% 

6.5% 

6.0% 

4.0% 

5.2% 

4.1% 

2.0% 

0.0% 


Warehousing 



Retail 

Accom odation 

and Food 

Services 

Finance and Real 

Es tate 

Wholesale 

Manufacturing 



3-5 Distribution of Establishments by Sector: 2004 


April 20, 2006 


• As shown in Figure 3-4, in 2004, Transportation and Warehousing comprised about 18 

percent of the City’s total establishments, followed closely by Health Care and Social 

Services establishments at about 17 percent. 

• The average number of employees per establishment in the City across all sectors 

declined from 17 in 2001 to 15 in 2004, as shown in Table 3-4. 

• Employee per establishment in the Professional, Scientific and Technical sector declined 

by about 48 percent from 9 in 2001 to 5 in 2004. 

• Per establishment employment for the Services and Retail sectors remained constant 

between 2001 and 2004 at 12 and 11, respectively. 

3.4 Sectoral Clustering in the City of Inglewood 

• Table 3-5 shows the distribution of firms by ZIP codes based on data from the U.S. 

Census 2003 County Business Patterns. The number of establishments in the County 

Business Patterns data is about 8 percent higher than the EDD estimates for 2004. 

• As shown Table 3-5, the City of Inglewood, as defined by the ZIP codes 90301, 90302, 

90303, 90304 and 90305, had a total of 1,996 firms in 2003. Establishments listed under 

ZIP code 90304 also include those in the City of Lennox. 

• As shown in Figure 3-5, nearly 50 percent of the firms in the City are located in ZIP code 

90301, followed by 16.8 percent in 90302. 

• Using the distribution of firms by sector within each ZIP code, and comparing this 

distribution to the City-wide distribution provides a rough estimate of concentration of 

sectors by geography. 

• As shown in Table 3-6, indexing the distribution of firms by sector by ZIP codes to the 

City-wide sectoral distribution results in locational indices or relative concentration of 

firms by sector by ZIP code. 

• Location of Health Care and Social Services firms is 1.8 and 1.3 times higher in ZIP 

codes 90305 and 90301, respectively, compared to the average sectoral distribution in the 

City. 

• Manufacturing related firms are around 2.3 times more concentrated in ZIP code 90302 

compared to the City average. 

• Transportation and Warehousing related firms are relatively more concentrated in ZIP 

codes 90301 and 90304. 


April 20, 2006 


Table 3-5 


Distribution of Firms by ZIP Codes: 2003 


Forestry, fishing, hunting, and agriculture 1 1 2 

Utilities 1 1 

Construction 19 26 5 9 4 63 

Manufacturing 37 33 5 8 2 85 

Wholesale trade 58 31 13 14 4 120 

Retail trade 112 38 63 51 21 285 

Transportation & warehousing 190 49 29 75 1 344 

Information 9 5 4 3 21 

Finance & insurance 32 9 13 2 3 1 60 

Real estate & rental & leasing 37 15 10 12 4 78 

Professional, scientific & technical services 43 15 10 10 3 81 

Management of companies & enterprises 2 1 1 4 

Admin, support, waste mgt, remediation services 31 14 5 13 6 1 70 

Educational services 14 5 2 1 6 28 

Health care and social assistance 216 33 30 18 37 334 

Arts, entertainment & recreation 13 4 6 5 2 30 

Accommodation & food services 57 18 17 57 10 159 

Other services (except public administration 107 36 28 29 17 217 

Unclassified establishments 4 5 3 1 1 14 

Total 982 336 246 309 121 2 1,996 

Percent of City Total 49.2% 16.8% 12.3% 15.5% 6.1% 0.1% 100.0% 


Forestry, fishing, hunting, and agriculture 0.1% 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 

Utilities 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 

Construction 1.9% 7.7% 2.0% 2.9% 3.3% 0.0% 3.2% 

Manufacturing 3.8% 9.8% 2.0% 2.6% 1.7% 0.0% 4.3% 

Wholesale trade 5.9% 9.2% 5.3% 4.5% 3.3% 0.0% 6.0% 

Retail trade 11.4% 11.3% 25.6% 16.5% 17.4% 0.0% 14.3% 

Transportation & warehousing 19.3% 14.6% 11.8% 24.3% 0.8% 0.0% 17.2% 

Information 0.9% 1.5% 1.6% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 

Finance & insurance 3.3% 2.7% 5.3% 0.6% 2.5% 50.0% 3.0% 

Real estate & rental & leasing 3.8% 4.5% 4.1% 3.9% 3.3% 0.0% 3.9% 

Professional, scientific & technical services 4.4% 4.5% 4.1% 3.2% 2.5% 0.0% 4.1% 

Management of companies & enterprises 0.2% 0.0% 0.4% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 

Admin, support, waste mgt, remediation services 3.2% 4.2% 2.0% 4.2% 5.0% 50.0% 3.5% 

Educational services 1.4% 1.5% 0.8% 0.3% 5.0% 0.0% 1.4% 

Health care and social assistance 22.0% 9.8% 12.2% 5.8% 30.6% 0.0% 16.7% 

Arts, entertainment & recreation 1.3% 1.2% 2.4% 1.6% 1.7% 0.0% 1.5% 

Accommodation & food services 5.8% 5.4% 6.9% 18.4% 8.3% 0.0% 8.0% 

Other services (except public administration 10.9% 10.7% 11.4% 9.4% 14.0% 0.0% 10.9% 

Unclassified establishments 0.4% 1.5% 1.2% 0.3% 0.8% 0.0% 0.7% 

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Pattern, 2003. 

3-5 Distribution of Firms by ZIP Codes 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 3-5 


Sectoral Concentration of Establishments by ZIP Codes: 2003 


U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns, 2003. 

3-6 Distribution of Firms by ZIP Codes 

Table 3-6 


Locational Index of Sectors by ZIP Codes: 2003 


Forestry, fishing, hunting, and agriculture 1.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 

Utilities 0.0 0.0 8.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 

Construction 0.6 2.5 0.6 0.9 1.0 0.0 1.0 

Manufacturing 0.9 2.3 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.0 1.0 

Wholesale trade 1.0 1.5 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.0 1.0 

Retail trade 0.8 0.8 1.8 1.2 1.2 0.0 1.0 

Transportation & warehousing 1.1 0.8 0.7 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 

Information 0.9 1.4 1.5 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.0 

Finance & insurance 1.1 0.9 1.8 0.2 0.8 16.6 1.0 

Real estate & rental & leasing 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.0 1.0 

Professional, scientific & technical services 1.1 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.0 1.0 

Management of companies & enterprises 1.0 0.0 2.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 1.0 

Admin, support, waste mgt, remediation ser 0.9 1.2 0.6 1.2 1.4 14.3 1.0 

Educational services 1.0 1.1 0.6 0.2 3.5 0.0 1.0 

Health care and social assistance 1.3 0.6 0.7 0.3 1.8 0.0 1.0 

Arts, entertainment & recreation 0.9 0.8 1.6 1.1 1.1 0.0 1.0 

Accommodation & food services 0.7 0.7 0.9 2.3 1.0 0.0 1.0 

Other services (except public administration 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.3 0.0 1.0 

Unclassified establishments 0.6 2.1 1.7 0.5 1.2 0.0 1.0 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Pattern, 2003. 

3-6 Locational Index of Sectors by ZIP Codes: 2003 


April 20, 2006 


3.5 City of Inglewood Compared with the Los Angeles County Economy 

• Table 3-7 shows the relative specialization of Inglewood compared to Los Angles 

County. This is shown by indexing the employment distribution of the City of Inglewood 

to the County. 


Entertainment and Recreation sector compared to the County. This can be explained by 

the relatively higher impact of the Hollywood Park Race Track and Casino on the City’s 

employment base. 

• The economy of Inglewood was also relatively more specialized in Transportation and 

Warehousing (3.2) and Health Care and Social Services (1.7). 

• Employment share in Retail, and Accommodation and Food Services sectors were 

comparable to the County-wide shares. 

• However, the below–average employment shares in Professional, Scientific and 

Technical (0.2), Information (0.2), Manufacturing (0.5) and Finance, Insurance and Real 

Estate (0.6) indicate sectors for potential future growth in the City. 

Table 3-7 

City of Inglewood and Los Angeles County 

Comparative Sectoral Specialization by Employment Distribution: 2004 


Percent 

Employment Distribution 


Percent 

Employment Distribution 

INDEX: LA=1 


Professional, Scientific and Technical 326 1.1% 239,998 5.9% 0.2 

Finance and Real Estate 1,045 3.7% 236,790 5.8% 0.6 

Information 244 0.9% 216,122 5.3% 0.2 

Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 2,143 7.5% 68,511 1.7% 4.4 

Services 9,188 32.2% 1,234,624 30.5% 1.1 

Manufacturing 1,782 6.2% 481,790 11.9% 0.5 

Retail 2,957 10.4% 406,540 10.0% 1.0 

Wholesale 1,326 4.6% 215,636 5.3% 0.9 

Government 4,916 17.2% 516,058 12.7% 1.4 

Construction 470 1.6% 140,813 3.5% 0.5 

Transportation and Warehousing 3,192 11.2% 142,261 3.5% 3.2 

Other 975 3.4% 150,791 3.7% 0.9 

Total 28,564 100.0% 4,049,934 100.0% 

Services 

Accomodation and Food Services 2,102 7.4% 304,889 7.5% 1.0 

Admin Support, Waste Mgmt 838 2.9% 252,292 6.2% 0.5 

Educational Services 366 1.3% 85,117 2.1% 0.6 

Health Care and Social Services 4,541 15.9% 370,424 9.1% 1.7 

Other Services 1,341 4.7% 221,902 5.5% 0.9 

Sub-total 9,188 32.2% 1,234,624 30.5% 1.1 



3-7 Comparative Sectoral Specialization by Employment Distribution: 2004 


April 20, 2006 


Chapter 4 – MARKET CONDITIONS AND TRENDS 

4.1 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales: 1994 to 2004 

As a major municipal General Fund revenue source, sales tax is a significant contributor to the 

economic vitality of the City. Taxable sales data as obtained from the California State Board of 

Equalization show the following trends: 

• As shown in Table 4-1 and Figure 4-1, total taxable sales transactions in the City of 

Inglewood have grown from 1994 to 2004, increasing in constant 2005 dollars from 

about $675.0 million in 1993 to $833.2 million in 2004. 

• Taxable Retail sales in the City grew annually at an average annual rate of 2.6 percent 

over the period 1994-2004. Taxable non-retail sales grew at less than one-sixth that rate, 

or about 0.4 percent annually. 

• Trends from 1994 to 2004 show that the City’s taxable sales consist primarily of retail 

sales, and this share has grown. In 1994, taxable retail sales comprised 77.5 percent of the 

total taxable sales and in 2004 it comprised 81.1 percent of the total taxable sales. This 

consistent with the decline in manufacturing activity in the City from 1994 to 2004. 

Table 4-1 

City of Inglewood Taxable Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 

(In ‘000s Constant 2005Dollars) 

Retail Non Retail Total 

Share of 

Retail 

1994 $522,915 $152,058 $674,973 77.5% 

1995 479,344 193,972 673,316 71.2% 

1996 480,565 199,206 679,771 70.7% 

1997 465,249 186,598 651,847 71.4% 

1998 438,059 192,426 630,484 69.5% 

1999 441,728 201,335 643,062 68.7% 

2000 586,583 245,260 831,843 70.5% 

2001 610,516 197,260 807,776 75.6% 

2002 605,810 170,708 776,518 78.0% 

2003 591,870 151,922 743,792 79.6% 

2004 $675,549 $157,614 $833,163 81.1% 

1994 to 2004 

Annual Average 2.6% 0.4% 2.1% 

Growth Rate 



4-1 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales Trends: 1994-2004 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 4-1 

City of Inglewood Taxable Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 

(In ‘000s Constant 2005 Dollars) 

$900,000 

$800,000 

$831,843 

$776,518 

$833,163 

$700,000 

$600,000 

$674,973 $679,771 

$630,484 

$586,583 

$605,810 

$675,549 

$522,915 

$500,000 

$400,000 

$300,000 

$480,565 

$438,059 

Retail 

Non-retail 

Total 

$200,000 

$100,000 

$0 

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 



4-1 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales Trends: 1994-2004 

4.2 City of Inglewood Taxable Retail Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 

• Taxable Retail sales in the City of Inglewood followed a pattern of initial decline from 

1994 to1999 and then rose appreciably from 2000 to 2004. These trends can be explained 

by stronger sales performance in key retail categories including General Merchandise, 

Building Materials and Apparel. 

• As shown in Table 4-2, General Merchandise, which is the single largest retail category 

in the City, initially declined from $135.6 million in 1994 to $109.9 million in 2000 and 

then increasing to $159.3 million by 2004 in constant 2005 dollars 

• Building Materials and Apparel retail sales followed patterns similar to General 

Merchandise, reaching a high of $65.1 million and $25.2 million, respectively. 

• The spurt in General Merchandise and Apparel retail sales can be attributed to new big 

box retail development in the City, including the Hollywood Park Marketplace. Similarly, 

the growth in Building Materials sales can be attributed to the Home Depot store opened 

recently at the same center. 


April 20, 2006 


Table 4-2 

City of Inglewood Taxable Sales by Retail Category: 1994 and 2004 

PANEL A 



1994 2000 2004 

1994-2000 

Percent 

Change 

2000-2004 

Percent 

Change 

Apparel Stores $10,864 $10,654 $25,216 -1.9% 136.7% 

General Merchandise Stores 135,576 109,892 159,289 -18.9% 45.0% 

Food Stores 49,697 50,479 44,582 1.6% -11.7% 

Eating and Drinking Places 78,016 82,736 86,720 6.1% 4.8% 

Home Furnishings 8,460 9,407 8,875 11.2% -5.7% 

Building Materials 49,454 38,159 65,102 -22.8% 70.6% 

Auto Dealers and parts 74,153 68,379 83,234 -7.8% 21.7% 

Service Stations 59,037 68,939 74,239 16.8% 7.7% 

Other Retail 57,658 147,938 158,363 156.6% 7.0% 

Total Retail $522,915 $586,583 $705,620 12.2% 20.3% 

Non-Retail $201,479 $245,260 $164,630 21.7% -32.9% 

Total $724,394 $831,843 $870,250 14.8% 4.6% 

DOF Population 1 114,179 112,580 117,640 

PANEL B 

Per Capita Taxable Transactions 


1994 2000 2004 

1994-2000 

Percent 

Change 

2000-2004 

Percent 

Change 

Apparel Stores $95 $95 $214 -0.5% 126.5% 

General Merchandise Stores 1,187 976 1,354 -17.8% 38.7% 

Food Stores 435 448 379 3.0% -15.5% 

Eating and Drinking Places 683 735 737 7.6% 0.3% 

Home Furnishings 74 84 75 12.8% -9.7% 

Building Materials 433 339 553 -21.7% 63.3% 

Auto Dealers and parts 649 607 708 -6.5% 16.5% 

Service Stations 517 612 631 18.4% 3.1% 

Other Retail 505 1,314 1,346 160.2% 2.4% 

Total Retail $4,580 $5,210 $5,998 13.8% 15.1% 

Non-Retail 1,765 2,179 1,399 23.5% -35.8% 

Total $6,344 $7,389 $7,398 16.5% 0.1% 

1.Other Retail includes liquor stores and other ancilllary stores. 

2. Population as reported by the California Department of Finance. 



California Department of Finance, ES-5 Population Projections. 

4-2 City of Inglewood Taxable Sales by Retail Category: 1994-2004 


April 20, 2006 


4.4 Comparative Taxable Retail Sales 

• Figure 4-2 and Table 4-3 show per capita taxable retail sales in constant 2005 dollars for 

Inglewood, nearby South Bay cities and Los Angeles County in year 2004. 

• Per capita taxable retail sales in Inglewood were lowest at $5,998 amongst the largest six 

cites in the South Bay. 

• In comparison, the South Bay cities and Los Angeles County had average per capita 

taxable retail sales of $8,980 and $8,939, respectively, as shown in Figure 4-2. 

$25,000 

Figure 4-2 


Per Capita Taxable Retail Sales: 2004 

(in Constant 2005 Dollars) 

$20,000 

$20,916 

$15,000 

$12,725 

$10,000 

$11,027 

$9,599 

$9,256 

$8,980 

$8,939 

$5,998 

$5,000 

$0 

Torrance Carson Redondo 

Beach 

Hawthorne Gardena Inglewood South Bay 

Cities 

Los 

Ange le s 

County 



4-2 Per Capita Taxable Retail Sales: 2004 


April 20, 2006 


PANEL A 

Table 4-3 


Taxable Retail Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 




1994 2000 2004 

Annual 

Average 

Growth Rate 

1994-2000 


Growth Rate 

2000-2004 



Carson 848,882 1,147,070 1,225,912 5.1% 1.7% 

El Segundo 211,125 426,402 413,342 12.4% -0.8% 

Gardena 470,047 535,719 561,617 2.2% 1.2% 

Hawthorne 586,809 595,158 846,813 0.2% 9.2% 

Hermosa Beach 147,429 233,235 232,282 7.9% -0.1% 

Lawndale 169,288 188,209 201,640 1.8% 1.7% 

Lomita 91,292 109,699 111,920 3.1% 0.5% 


Palos Verdes Estate 10,501 13,069 11,630 3.7% -2.9% 

Rancho Palos Verdes 60,818 69,599 69,826 2.3% 0.1% 

Redondo Beach 730,851 738,454 738,267 0.2% 0.0% 

Rolling Hills 974 91 933 -32.7% 79.2% 


Torrance $2,624,838 $3,164,677 $3,059,289 3.2% -0.8% 

South Bay Total $7,055,575 $6,741,282 $6,921,075 -0.8% 0.7% 

Share of Inglewood 7.41% 8.70% 10.20% 2.7% 4.0% 

Los Angeles County $65,967,009 $82,697,286 $90,346,952 3.8% 2.2% 

PANEL B 

Per Capita Retail Sales ('000s) 


1994 2000 2004 

Annual 

Average 

Growth Rate 

1994-2000 


Growth Rate 

2000-2004 


Carson 9,787 12,784 12,725 4.6% -0.1% 

El Segundo 13,408 26,595 24,505 12.1% -2.0% 

Gardena 8,676 9,277 9,256 1.1% -0.1% 

Hawthorne 7,845 7,076 9,599 -1.7% 7.9% 

Hermosa Beach 7,839 12,563 11,878 8.2% -1.4% 

Lawndale 5,862 5,935 6,069 0.2% 0.6% 

Lomita 4,628 5,472 5,331 2.8% -0.7% 

Manhattan Beach 13,166 15,902 14,930 3.2% -1.6% 

Palos Verdes Estate 765 980 825 4.2% -4.2% 

Rancho Palos Verdes 1,434 1,692 1,617 2.8% -1.1% 

Redondo Beach 11,594 11,673 11,027 0.1% -1.4% 

Rolling Hills 507 48 476 -32.4% 77.1% 


Torrance 19,101 22,941 20,916 3.1% -2.3% 

South Bay Cities $9,897 $9,240 $8,980 -1.1% -0.7% 

Los Angeles County $7,108 $8,687 $8,939 3.4% 0.7% 




4-3 South Bay Cities: Taxable Retail Sales Trends: 1994 to 2004 


April 20, 2006 


4.5 City of Inglewood Retail Leakage Analysis 

• Table 4-4 presents per capita sales in the City of Inglewood as a ratio of those in Los 

Angeles County in 2004. This is provided as a measure of retail leakage from the City’s 

market area. 

• As shown in Table 4-3, total Per Capita retail sales in the City of Inglewood were 

approximately 30 percent lower than those in the County of Los Angeles. 

• Retail categories that performed better than or near par with the County of Los Angeles 

included General Merchandise (1.04) and Other Retail (0.95). 

• Retail categories that indicated high levels of leakage included Home Furnishings (0.18), 

Auto Dealers and Parts (0.37), and Apparel Stores (0.43). 

Table 4-4 

City of Inglewood and County of Los Angeles 

Comparative Per Capita Taxable Sales: 2004 




County of 

Los Angeles 

Leakage 

Factor 

Apparel Stores $214 $497 0.43 

General Merchandise Stores 1,354 1,301 1.04 

Food Stores 379 436 0.87 

Eating and Drinking Places 737 1,244 0.59 

Home Furnishings 75 417 0.18 

Building Materials 553 817 0.68 

Auto Dealers and parts 708 1,899 0.37 

Service Stations 631 911 0.69 

Other Retail 1 1,346 1,417 0.95 

Total Retail $5,998 $8,939 0.67 

1. Includes Liquor Stores and other ancillary stores. 




4-4 Comparative Per Capita Taxable Retail Sales: 2004 


April 20, 2006 


4.6 Retail Market Inventory in the City of Inglewood 

• Table 4-5 presents the retail market inventory for the City of Inglewood compiled from 

the 2003 Shopping Center Directory and field surveys conducted by Stanley R. Hoffman 

Associates, Inc in April, 2006. 

• There are a total of 16 shopping centers identified in the City of Inglewood, not counting 

strip commercial and downtown commercial along major arterials. 

• Retail centers in Inglewood have an estimated 1,572,788 square feet of retail space. 

• The newest retail development within the city is located to the east and south of 

Hollywood Park. The Hollywood Park Marketplace, The Village at Century and the 

Costco/Silvercreek Properties (Century Plaza) centers have a total of over 800,000 square 

feet of retail space—50 percent of the estimated total square footage. 

4.7 Retail Market Lease and Vacancy Rates: 2006 

• As shown in Table 4-6, retail lease rates in the City of Inglewood currently range from 

$0.92 - $3.00 per square foot (NNN) depending on location and size of retail space. 

• In 2006, the City had an estimated total vacancy of about 67,363 sq.ft or 4.3 percent of 

the total retail center inventory. 

• The largest vacant retail space of 40,608 sq.ft was found in the Crenshaw Imperial 

Shopping Center. 


April 20, 2006 


Table 4-5 


Retail Market Inventory: 2006 

Shopping Center Name Intersection Type 1 /Year Built 

Total Sq. 

Ft. 

Anchors 

Anchor 

Square 

Feet 

1 Airport Plaza Northwest corner ISIS and N 23,523 

Manchester - 1117 Manchester 

2 Century Hawthorne Southeast corner of Century and N 12,407 

Hawthorne Boulevards 1985 

3 Century Plaza Southeast corner Yukon Ave and C 210,000 Costco 150,000 

Century Blvd 2005 

4 Century Square Southeast corner Century and N 16,309 

Hawthorne Boulevards 1986 

5 Crenshaw Imperial Shopping Center Northeast corner Imperial Hwy C 152,360 Superior Market 40,000 

and Crenshaw 1958 Rite Aid Pharmacy 17,000 

6 Crenshaw Imperial Plaza Southeast corner of Imperial Hwy C 215,034 Sav-on Drugs 22,500 

and Crenshaw 1960 RAC Rent-a-Center 5,110 

U.S. Post Office 4,800 

7 Food 4 Less Southwest corner of Century and C 109,014 Food 4 Less 79,101 

Crenshaw 

8 Hollywood Park Plaza Southwest corner of Prairie Ave. N 30,212 

and E. Hardy St. 

9 Hollywood Park Marketplace Northeast corner of Century and Yukon R 435,000 Target 111,000 

2005 Home Depot 130,000 

Gigante 90,000 

Staples 20,300 

10 Inglewood Center Southeast corner of S. Market and Florence C 102,276 Sav-on Drugs 25,000 

and East Florence 1966 Kragen Auto Parts 15,000 

11 La Brea Plaza Southeast corner of La Brea and N 45,100 

Centinela 

12 Manchester Business Park North side of W. Manchester N 8,352 

between Isis and Hindry 

13 Manchester Plaza Southwest corner of Manchester N 4,516 

and Eucalyptus 

14 Unnamed Shopping Center North side of W. Manchester N 8,519 

between Ash and Oak 

15 The Village at Century South side of Century Blvd. C 193,000 Bed, Bath and Beyond 38,000 

east of Yukon 2006 Ross 33,650 

Marshalls 33,600 

16 Village Manchester Southwest corner Manchester N 7,166 

and Inglewood Aves. 

Total 1,572,788 

1. C = Community (100,000 to 300,000 sq. ft.) , N = Neighborhood (30,000 to 100,000 sq. ft.), 

R = Regional (300,000 to > 1,000,000 sq. ft.), SR = Super Regional (> 1,000,000 sq. ft.) 


Shopping Center Directory-West 2003, National Research Bureau. 

4-5 Retail Market Inventory: 2006 


April 20, 2006 


Table 4-6 


Retail Market Lease and Vacancy Rates: 2006 

Shopping Center Rate/SF/Month Vacant Total Vacancy 

Name/Location NNN SF SF Rate 

1 Airport Plaza Not Available 6,422 23,523 27.3% 

2 Century Hawthorne Not Available 0 12,407 0.0% 

3 Century Plaza Not Available 0 210,000 0.0% 

4 Century Square $2.05 0 16,309 0.0% 

5 Crenshaw Imperial Shopping Center $1.50-$2.25 8,709 152,360 5.7% 

6 Crenshaw Imperial Plaza $1.25-$2.25 40,608 215,034 18.9% 

7 Food 4 Less Not Available 0 109,014 0.0% 

8 Holly Park Plaza Not Available 2,702 30,212 8.9% 

9 Hollywood Park Marketplace Not Available 0 435,000 0.0% 

10 Inglewood Center Not Available 6,083 102,276 5.9% 

11 La Brea Plaza $1.25-$2.37 2,839 45,100 6.3% 

12 Manchester Business Park Not Available 0 8,352 0.0% 

13 Manchester Plaza Not Available 0 4,516 0.0% 

14 Unnamed Shopping Center Not Available 0 8,519 0.0% 

15 The Village at Century (2) $0.92-$3.00 0 193,000 0.0% 

16 Village Manchester Not Available 0 7,166 0.0% 

Total 67,363 1,572,788 4.3% 

1.Triple net ("NNN") rental rate assumes that tenant pays their share of operating expenses, such as 

property taxes, utilities and maintenance and insurance. 

2. The Village at Century project has just been completed and businesses are starting to open. 

Businesses that have not opened are not included under vacancies. 

Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates 

4-6 Retail Market Lease and Vacancy Rates: 2006 


April 20, 2006 


Chapter 5 – Real Estate Trends 

5.1 Building Activity 

Non-residential Building Activity 

• Table 5-1 and Figure 5-1 show non-residential building activity trends in the City of 

Inglewood from 1994 to 2004 based on the data provided by the Construction Industry 

Research Board. 

• As shown in constant 2006 dollars, nearly all of the building activity permitted in terms 

of valuation over this time period was commercial, which averaged 99.8 percent of the 

total valuation annually compared to just 0.2 percent for industrial valuation. 

• As shown in Figure 5-1, industrial building activity only occurred in 1999 and the 

valuation for this industrial building was quite small, only $189,000. 

• The valuation for new commercial buildings displayed significant fluctuation over the 10 

year time period. The valuation (in constant 2006 dollars) for new commercial buildings 

ranged from just $612,000 in 1995 to about 28.3 million in 2003. 

Table 5-1 


Non-Residential Building Permit Valuations: 1994-2004 

(In thousands of constant 2006 dollars) 

Year Commercial % of Total Industrial % of Total Total Units 

1994 $1,963 100.0% $0 0.0% $1,963 

1995 612 100.0% 0 0.0% 612 

1996 1,674 100.0% 0 0.0% 1,674 

1997 704 100.0% 0 0.0% 704 

1998 1,994 100.0% 0 0.0% 1,994 

1999 11,572 98.4% 189 1.6% 11,761 

2000 17,855 100.0% 0 0.0% 17,855 

2001 1,370 100.0% 0 0.0% 1,370 

2002 3,659 100.0% 0 0.0% 3,659 

2003 28,331 100.0% 0 0.0% 28,331 

2004 $8,898 100.0% $0 0.0% $8,898 

Annual Average $7,148 99.8% $17 0.2% $7,166 



5-1 Non-Residential Building Permit Valuations: 1994-2004 


April 20, 2006 


Figure 5-1 


Non-Residential Building Activity: 1994-2004 


$30,000 

$25,000 

$20,000 

$15,000 

$10,000 

$5,000 

$0 

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Commercial 

Industrial 


Construction Industry Research Board, 2005. 

5-1 Non Residential Building Activity: 1992-2004 

Residential Building Activity 

• Table 5-2 and Figure 5-2 show residential building activity from 1994 to 2004 in the City 

of Inglewood based on the data provided by the Construction Industry Research Board. 

Over this time period, a total of 346 housing units were permitted. Only 37.9 percent of 

total units permitted were single-family residences while 62.1 percent were multi-family 

units. 

• The data indicates that on an average, 31 new residential units were permitted every year, 

of which 12 were single-family units and 20 were multi-family units. However, at least 

200 more units have been added to the housing stock since 2004. 

• As shown in Table 5-2, on average from 1994 to 2004, there were more multi-family 

units than multi-family units permitted. As shown in Figure 5-2, the permitting of new 

units fluctuated over this period. 


April 20, 2006 


Year 

Table 5-2 


Residential Building Activity: 1994 to 2004 


Single- 

Family 

% of 

Total 

Multi- 

Family 

% of 

Total 

Total 

Units 

1994 6 100.0% 0 0.0% 6 

1995 9 36.0% 16 64.0% 25 

1996 9 60.0% 6 40.0% 15 

1997 2 5.6% 34 94.4% 36 

1998 6 16.2% 31 83.8% 37 

1999 23 92.0% 2 8.0% 25 

2000 13 59.1% 9 40.9% 22 

2001 3 3.0% 97 97.0% 100 

2002 22 84.6% 4 15.4% 26 

2003 9 42.9% 12 57.1% 21 

2004 29 87.9% 4 12.1% 33 

Total 131 215 346 

Annual Average 12 37.9% 20 62.1% 31 



5-2 Residential Building Activity: 1994-2004 

120 

Figure 5-2 


Residential Building Activity: 1995 to 2005 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Single- Family 

Multi- Family 


Construction Industry Research Board, 2005. 

5-2 Residential Building Activity 


April 20, 2006 


5.2 Housing Value 

Single Family Residential 

• As shown in Table 5-3, according to DataQuick the median price of a single-family 

residence sold in the City of Inglewood in February, 2006 was $475,000. 

• In comparison, the median price of a single-family residence sold in the South Bay Cities 

was significantly higher at $795,000, and $525,000 in the County. 

• Within the South Bay, the City of Manhattan Beach had the highest single-family 

residence median sales price at $1.95 million. 

Table 5-3 


Single Family Median Sales Price: February 2006 

Single Family Residences 

ZIP CODE No. Sold Price ('000s) % change 1 

Inglewood 90301 3 $470 17.4% 

Inglewood 90302 8 458 26.2% 




Inglewood Total 21 $475 n/a 

Carson 90745 21 $500 17.1% 

Carson 90746 10 540 22.6% 

El Segundo 90245 4 920 26.5% 

Gardena 90247 10 449 16.8% 

Gardena 90248 2 464 14.1% 

Gardena 90249 12 510 18.3% 

Hawthorne 90250 22 538 13.8% 

Hermosa Beach 90254 4 970 -2.1% 

Lawndale 90260 8 580 27.8% 

Lomita 90717 6 549 -1.5% 

Manhattan Beach 90266 22 1,950 23.8% 

Palos Verdes Estates 2 90274 15 1,375 11.7% 

Rancho Palos Verdes 90275 11 1,100 14.3% 

Redondo Beach 90277 10 1,000 23.5% 

Redondo Beach 90278 17 731 2.0% 

Torrance 90501 15 555 13.3% 

Torrance 90502 7 540 25.0% 

Torrance 90503 13 758 15.8% 

Torrance 90504 9 615 8.1% 

Torrance 90505 12 775 3.5% 

South Bay Cities Total 251 $795 n/a 


Los Angeles County 4,299 $525 19.3% 

1. Indicates percent change from February, 2005. 

2. Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Estates fall within the zip code 90274. 


DataQuick Datanews. February, 06 

5-3 Single Family Median Sales Price: February 2006 


April 20, 2006 


Condominiums 

• As shown in Table 5-4, the median price of a condominium sold in the City of Inglewood 

in February, 2006 was around $330,000. 

• In comparison, the median condominium sales price in the South Bay Cities was 

estimated significantly higher at about $500,000, and in the County at $407,000. 

• Within the South Bay, the City of Hermosa Beach had the highest median sales price for 

condominiums at $1.12 million. 

Table 5-4 


Condominium Median Sales Price: February 2006 

Condominiums 

ZIP CODE No. Sold Price ('000s) % change 1 






Inglewood Total 19 $330 n/a 

Carson 90745 10 340 55.4% 

Carson 90746 n/a n/a n/a 

El Segundo 90245 6 465 10.3% 

Gardena 90247 6 390 42.3% 

Gardena 90248 n/a n/a n/a 

Gardena 90249 1 365 52.4% 

Hawthorne 90250 5 373 49.2% 

Hermosa Beach 90254 4 1120 39.1% 

Lawndale 90260 5 370 -17.5% 

Lomita 90717 3 337 -34.8% 

Manhattan Beach 90266 3 850 -35.7% 

Palos Verdes Estates 2 90274 n/a n/a n/a 

Rancho Palos Verdes 90275 3 583 33.1% 

Redondo Beach 90277 9 600 -6.1% 

Redondo Beach 90278 16 655 6.4% 

Torrance 90501 6 538 26.5% 

Torrance 90502 6 331 6.9% 

Torrance 90503 6 675 32.6% 

Torrance 90504 2 477 9.2% 

Torrance 90505 6 534 22.1% 

South Bay Cities Total 116 $500 n/a 


Los Angeles County 1,107 407 15.6% 

1. Indicates percent change from February, 2005. 

2. Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Estates fall within the zip code 90274. 


DataQuick Datanews. February, 06 

5-4 Condominium Median Sales Price: May 2005 


April 20, 2006 


5.3 Multi-Family Rental Market 

• As shown in Figure 5-3, according to the 2000 Census, the median monthly contract rent 

(in nominal dollars) for the City of Inglewood was $613. This was slightly lower than the 

median contract rent for Los Angeles County at $643. 

• The median contract rent in 2006 dollars is estimated to be $751 for Inglewood, and $788 

for the County. 

$900 

Figure 5-3 

Comparative Median Contract Rent: 2000 and 2006 1 

$800 

$751 

$788 

$700 

$600 

$613 

$643 

$500 

$400 

$300 


Los Angeles 

2000 2006 

1. The 2006 Median Contract Rent was estimated by inflating the Census 2000 median contract rent using 

the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or a factor of 1.25 



5-3 Comparative Median Contract Rent: 2000 and 2006 


April 20, 2006 


Chapter 6– LOCATIONAL AND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES 

The following chapter presents the key locational and economic opportunities in the City of 

Inglewood that could provide impetus to the economy of Inglewood. These include opportunities 

arising from proximity to LAX, tourism and lodging industry, and the redevelopment of the 

Hollywood Park, the Forum and the Downtown area. 

6.1 Los Angeles International Airport 

• The passenger volume at LAX is projected to increase from just over 60 million air 

passengers (MAPs) in 2004 to 78.0 MAP in 2030. Most of the additional passenger 

volume is projected to be handled by other airports in the region such as Ontario and 

Palmdale. 

• The air cargo volume at LAX is projected to increase from 2.0 million tons in 2003 to 2.3 

million tons in 2030. Most of the growth in air cargo is expected to be handled by other 

regional airports. 

• The environmental analysis of the LAX Master Plan 2000 Draft EIS/EIR resulted in the 

formulation of Alternative D that was presented and evaluated in the 2003 LAX Master 

Plan Addendum and 2003 Supplement to the Draft EIS/EIR. 

• Alternative D was a new alternative in response to public comment on Master Plan 

Alternatives A,B,C and the No Action/No Project Alternative. 

• Alternative D was developed to offer a regional airport development alternative for LAX. 

It would be designed to serve approximately 78 million annual passengers which is 

similar to the activity level identified in the scenario adopted by SCAG for LAX. It 

would encourage other airports in the region to develop facilities to accommodate 

regional demand beyond the level served at LAX. 

• Alternative D is intended to respond to increased security threats with the objective of 

providing a facility that can continue to operate under the highest security levels with 

minimal impacts to the passenger processing experience. 

• The ground access network would be redeveloped to limit vehicle access to the central 

terminal area (CTA) and to remove vehicle parking from the area. The CTA would be 

accessed via the Landside Automated People Mover (APM) system. 

• Some of the other components of Alternative D include: four new passenger terminals, 

new aircraft rescue and firefighting facilities, parallel taxiways between the runways on 

the north and south airfields to reduce the potential for runway incursions and airfield 

reconfigurations to provide unrestricted movement for New Large Aircraft (NLA). 

Alternative D also includes a new Ground Transportation Center (GTC) to improve the 

landside level of service at LAX, a Consolidated Rental Car Facility and an Intermodal 

Transportation Center. 

• The LAX Master Plan Stipulated Settlement was approved by Mayor Villaraigosa and the 

Los Angeles City Council in early 2006 resulting in an historic settlement of lawsuits 


April 20, 2006 


filed against the LAX Master Plan. It was also approved by other cities including the 

City of Inglewood. 

• The settlement allows LAWA to begin construction on the LAX South Airfield 

Improvement Project and to develop new plans for LAX consistent with the Mayor’s 

vision for the regional redistribution of aviation demand. 

• The settlement will create a community-based planning process to revisit and potentially 

replace controversial “yellow light” projects such as the Manchester Square Ground 

Transportation Center. 

6.2 Tourism and Lodging 

• The majority of the hotels and motels in Inglewood serve tourists and business travelers 

from Los Angeles International Airport. 

• The hotels and motels are primarily located along Century Boulevard, as well as 

Manchester Avenue and the Imperial Highway. 

• As shown in Table 6-1, the City of Inglewood generated about $1.84 million in transient 

occupancy tax revenue for 2002-2003. Of the South Bay Cities, Torrance generated the 

most amount of transient occupancy tax revenue with about $5.52 million. 

Table 6-1 


Transient Occupancy Tax Revenues in 2002-2003 

Revenue 

% of South Bay 

Cities 

Inglewood $1,835,682 10.1% 

Carson 804,397 4.4% 

El Segundo 2,866,811 15.8% 

Gardena 475,298 2.6% 

Hawthorne 929,673 5.1% 

Hermosa Beach 1,054,272 5.8% 

Lawndale 297,339 1.6% 

Lomita 100,792 0.6% 

Manhattan Beach 2,040,428 11.2% 

Palos Verdes Estates 0 0.0% 

Rancho Palos Verdes 15,508 0.1% 

Redondo Beach 2,257,526 12.4% 

Rolling Hills 0 0.0% 

Rolling Hills Estates 0 0.0% 

Torrance $5,523,329 30.3% 

Total South Bay Cities $18,201,055 100.0% 

1. The transient occupancy tax for the City of Los Angeles is excluded 

because it is reported as an aggregate for the City and not by sub-area, 

such as along Century Blvd. leading into LAX. 


California State Controller 

6-1 Transient Occupancy Tax Revenues in 2002-2003 


April 20, 2006 


6.3 Hollywood Park 

• The Hollywood Park Race Track is situated on 240 acres of land just 3 miles east of the 

Los Angeles International Airport. 

• In July 2005, Churchill Downs sold the Hollywood Park Race Track to the Bay Meadows 

Land Company for $260 million. 

• Under the terms of the deal, the Bay Meadows Land Company will continue 

thoroughbred racing at the track for at least three more years. 

• After this three year guarantee, the continuation of Hollywood Park as a racing venue 

depends on California allowing the addition of alternative forms of gambling, such as slot 

machines, to the track. 

• In July 2005, Hollywood Park Inc. sold 42 acres of underutilized land for the construction 

of a retail center that includes Target, Home Depot and Gigante Market. 

• The City of Inglewood’s Office of Economic and Business Development is expected to 

work closely with the Bay Meadows Land Company to secure community and 

stakeholder input and ideas on various elements of the master planning process for the 

redevelopment of the Hollywood Park property. 

6.4 The Forum 

• The Forum is located at the southeast corner of Manchester Boulevard and Praire 

Avenue. It can hold approximately 18,000 people for concerts and services. 

• Since professional sports teams such as the Los Angeles Kings, the Los Angeles Lakers, 

and the Sparks have moved out of the Forum, the site has continued to be used for large 

concerts and weekly church services, but has lost its position within Los Angeles as the 

premiere entertainment venue. 

• The Forum, which is currently under the ownership of the Faithful Central Bible Church, 

is exploring the idea of using its underutilized parking area for housing and retail 

development. 

6.5 Downtown 

• Within the downtown area, there is an increased focus on economic development and 

mixed use development. It is the City’s hope to have a vibrant downtown, centering on 

Market Street, that has commercial, residential, business, governmental and 

entertainment uses. 

• For the future, a Business Improvement District (BID) is being considered to revitalize 

the downtown business environment. 


April 20, 2006 


Appendix A 

Appendix Table A-1 

SIC to NAICS CROSSWALK 

SIC NAICS BRIDGE CATEGORIES 

AGRICULTURE,FORESTRY,FISHING AGRICULTURE,FORESTRY,FISHING & HUNTING Farming, Fishing, Forestry, Mining 

CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION Construction 

FEDERAL GOVT FEDERAL GOVT Government 

FINANCE,INSURANCE,REAL ESTATE FINANCE & INSURANCE FIRE 

REAL ESTATE & RENTAL & LEASING 

LOCAL GOVT LOCAL GOVT Government 

MANUFACTURING-DURABLE MANUFACTURING Manufacturing 

MANUFACTURING-NONDURABLE 

MINING MINING Farming, Fishing, Forestry, Mining 

RETAIL TRADE RETAIL TRADE Retail 

STATE GOVT STATE GOVT Government 

TRANS,COMM,ELEC,GAS,SANITARY SERVICES TRANSPORTATION & WAREHOUSING Transporation, Comm, Utlities 

UTILITIES 

WHOLESALE TRADE WHOLESALE TRADE Wholesale 

NON-CLASSIFIED 

NON-CLASSIFIED 

SERVICES ACCOMMODATION & FOOD SERVICES Services 

ADMIN & SUPPORT & WASTE MGMT & REMEDIATION 

ARTS, ENTERTAINMENT, & RECRETION 

EDUCATIONAL SERVICES 

HEALTH CARE & SOCIAL ASSISTANCE 

INFORMATION 

MANAGEMENT OF COMPANIES AND ENTERPRISES 

OTHER SERVICES 

PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC, & TECHNICAL SKILLS 


A-1 SIC to NAICS Crosswalk 


April 20, 2006 


Appendix Table A-2 

Self Employment Rates by NAICS Categories 

ID Industry\County 37 SCAG U.S. 

72 Accommodation and Food Service 4.8% 4.2% 3.0% 

56 Administrative and Support and Waste Services 16.0% 16.3% 9.3% 

71 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 21.0% 17.5% 16.8% 

23 Construction 18.7% 16.6% 20.5% 

61 Educational Services 1.8% 1.9% 1.3% 

52 Finance and Insurance 6.1% 6.3% 5.3% 

62 Health Care and Social Assistance 7.9% 8.2% 6.5% 

51 Information 5.8% 5.3% 3.7% 

55 Management of Companies and Enterprises 3.3% 2.8% 0.0% 

31 Manufacturing 2.6% 2.6% 1.9% 

21 Natural Resources and Mining 4.5% 3.2% 2.2% 

81 Other Services 20.7% 21.1% 14.6% 

54 Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 17.9% 18.0% 14.2% 

92 Public Administration 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 

53 Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 15.7% 16.5% 17.3% 

44 Retail Trade 8.5% 7.6% 6.2% 

11 Total Farm 15.2% 9.9% 43.5% 

10 Total, All Industries 8.5% 8.4% 7.2% 

48 Transportation and Warehousing 4.5% 5.1% 6.0% 

22 Utilities 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 

42 Wholesale Trade 6.0% 5.9% 3.8% 

LA 

Source: 2000 Census 5 percent Public Use Microdata Sample, as provided by SCAG. 

A-2 Self Employment Rates by NAICS Categories 


April 20, 2006 


Appendix B 

Project Contacts 


Richard McNish, Economic Development Manager 

(310) 412-8800 

Wanda Williams, City Redevelopment Agency 

(310) 412-5290 

Baron McCoy, City Redevelopment Agency 

(310) 412-5290 

EIP Associates 

Shannon Kimball, Associate Planner 

(310) 268-8132 


April 20, 2006 



Appendix B 

Sensitive Species Potentially 

Occurring within the City of 

Inglewood

Appendix B 

Common Name 

Sensitive Species Potentially Occurring within the City of Inglewood 

Scientific Name 

Status 2 

Fed/CA/CNPS 

Habitat and Seasonal Distribution in California 

Potential to 

Occur Onsite 

WILDLIFE 

Fish 

Mohave tui chub 

Invertebrates 

Tiger beetle 

Sandy beach 

tiger beetle 

Gila bicolor 

mohavensis 

Cicindela latesignata 

latesignata 

Cicindela hirticollis 

gravida 

FED: FE 

CA: SE 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

Busck's gall moth Carolella busckana FED: None 

CA: SC 

Belkin's dune 

tabanid fly 

Globose dune 

beetle 

Brennania belkini 

Coelus globosus 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus FED: None 

CA: SC 

Henne's eucosman 

moth 

El Segundo blue 

butterfly 

Palos Verdes blue 

butterfly 

Eucosma hennei 

Euphilotes battoides 

allyni 

Glaucopsyche 

lygdamus 

palosverdesensis 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

FED: FE 

CA: None 

FED: FE 

CA: None 

Mimic tryonia Tryonia imitator FED: None 

CA: SC 

Lange's El 

Segundo dune 

weevil 

Wandering 

skipper 

Gertsch’s 

socalchemmis 

spider 

Dorothy's El 

Segundo Dune 

weevil 

Reptiles 

Coast (San Diego) 

horned lizard 

Onychobaris langei 

Panoquina errans 

Socalchemmis gertschi 

Trigonoscuta dorothea 

dorothea 

Phrynosoma 

coronatum 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

Endemic to the Mohave River basin, 

adapted to alkaline, mineralized 

waters. 

Mudflats and beaches in coastal 


Inhabits areas adjacent to nonbrackish 

water along the coast of 

California from San Francisco bay 

to Northern Mexico. 

Inhabits coastal sand dunes of 


Inhabitant of coastal sand dune 

habitat, from bodega head in 

Sonoma County south to Ensenada, 

Mexico. 

Winter roost sites extend along the 

coast from Northern Mendocino to 

Baja California, Mexico. 

Endemic to the El Segundo dunes 

(type locality), Los Angeles County. 

Restricted to remnant coastal dune 

habitat in Southern California. 

Restricted to the cool, fog-shrouded, 

seaward side of Palos Verdes Hills, 

Los Angeles County. 

Inhabits coastal lagoons, estuaries 

and salt marshes, from Sonoma 

County south to San Diego County. 

Known from El Segundo dunes. 

Southern California coastal salt 

marshes. 

Known from only two localities in Los 

Angeles county, Brentwood (type 

locality) and Topanga Canyon. 

Coastal sand dunes in Los Angeles 

County. 

Inhabits coastal sage scrub and 

chaparral in arid and semi-arid 

climate conditions. 

Absent 

Absent 

Absent 

Absent 

Absent 

Absent 

Low 

Low 

Absent 

Absent 

Absent 

Absent 

Low 

Low 

Absent 

Low 

General Plan Technical Background Report B-1

Appendix B 

Common Name 

Southwestern 

pond turtle 

Birds 

Tricolored 

blackbird 



Emys marmorata 

pallida 

Agelaius tricolor 

Status 2 

Fed/CA/CNPS 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia FED: None 

CA: SC 

Western snowy 

plover 

Southwestern 

willow flycatcher 

California black 

rail 

Belding's 

savannah 

sparrow 

Coastal 

California 

gnatcatcher 

California least 

tern 

Mammals 

South coast marsh 

vole 

Charadrius 

alexandrinus nivosus 

Empidonax traillii 

extimus 

Laterallus jamaicensis 

coturniculus 

Passerculus 

sandwichensis beldingi 

Polioptila californica 

californica 

Sterna antillarum 

browni 

Microtus californicus 

stephensi 

FED: FT 

CA: SC 

FED: FE 

CA: FE 

FED: None 

CA: ST 

FED: None 

CA: SE 

FED: FT 

CA: SC 

FED: FE 

CA: SE 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

American badger Taxidea taxus FED: None 

CA: SC 

Southern 

California 

saltmarsh shrew 

Big free -tailed 

bat 

Pacific pocket 

mouse 

Sorex ornatus 

salicornicus 

Nyctinomops macrotis 

Perognathus 

longimembris pacificus 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

FED: None 

CA: SC 

FED: FE 

CA: SC 


Inhabits permanent or nearly 

permanent bodies of water in many 

habitat types; below 6000 ft 

elevation. 

(Nesting colony) Highly colonial 

species, most numerous in Central 

Valley & vicinity. Largely endemic 

to California. 

(Burrow sites) Open, dry annual or 

perennial grasslands, deserts & 

scrublands characterized by lowgrowing 

vegetation. 

(Nesting) Federal listing applies 

only to the pacific coastal 

population. 

(Nesting) Riparian woodlands in 

Southern California. State listing 

includes all subspecies. 

Mainly inhabits salt-marshes 

bordering larger bays. 

Inhabits coastal salt marshes, from 

Santa Barbara south through San 

Diego County. 

Obligate, permanent resident of 

coastal sage scrub below 2500 ft in 


(Nesting colony) Nests along the 

coast from San Francisco Bay south 

to Northern Baja California. 

Tidal marshes in Los Angeles, 

Orange and Southern Ventura 

Counties. 

Most abundant in drier open stages 

of most shrub, forest, and 

herbaceous habitats, with friable 

soils. 

Coastal marshes in Los Angeles, 

Orange and Ventura Counties. 

Low-lying arid areas in Southern 

California. 

Inhabits the narrow coastal plains 

from the Mexican border north to El 

Segundo, Los Angeles County. 

Potential to 

Occur Onsite 

Low 

Low 

Absent 

Absent 

Low 

Absent 

Absent 

Moderate 

Absent 

Moderate 

Absent 

Absent 

Low 

Low 

B-2 

City of Inglewood

Appendix B 

Common Name 



Status 2 

Fed/CA/CNPS 

PLANTS 

Aphanisma Aphanisma blitoides FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

Greata's aster Aster greatae FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

Braunton's milkvetch 

Ventura Marsh 

milk-vetch 

Coastal dunes 

milk-vetch 

South Coast 

saltscale 

Parish's 

brittlescale 

Davidson's 

saltscale 

Plummer's 

mariposa lily 

Santa Barbara 

morning-glory 

Southern tarplant 

Orcutt's pincushion 

San Fernando 

Valley 

spineflower 

Salt marsh bird'sbeak 

Astragalus brauntonii 

Astragalus 

pycnostachyus var. 

lanosissimus 

Astragalus tener var. 

titi 

Atriplex pacifica 

Atriplex parishii 

Atriplex serenana var. 

davidsonii 

Calochortus 

plummerae 

Calystegia sepium ssp. 

binghamiae 

Centromadia parryi 

ssp. australis 

Chaenactis 

glabriuscula var. 

orcuttiana 

Chorizanthe parryi 

var. fernandina 

Cordylanthus 

maritimus ssp. 

maritimus 

FED: FE 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: FE 

CA: SE 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: FE 

CA: SE 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1A 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: FC 

CA: SE 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: FE 

CA: SE 

CNPS: 1B 


Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, 

coastal scrub. 

Chaparral, cismontane woodland. 

Closed-cone coniferous forest, 

chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and 

foothill grassland. 

Coastal salt marsh. 

Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes. 

Coastal scrub, coastal bluff scrub, 

playas, chenopod scrub. 

Alkali meadows, vernal pools, 

chenopod scrub, playas. 

Coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub. 

Coastal scrub, chaparral, valley and 

foothill grassland, cismontane 

woodland, lower montane 

coniferous forest. 

Coastal marshes. 

Marshes and swamps (margins), 

valley and foothill grassland, vernal 

pools. 

Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes. 

Coastal scrub. 

Coastal salt marsh, coastal dunes. 

Potential to 

Occur Onsite 

Low 

Absent 

Absent 

Absent 

Moderate 

Low 

Low 

Low 

Low 

Absent 

Moderate 

Absent 

Low 

Absent 


Appendix B 

Common Name 

Beach 

spectaclepod 

Many-stemmed 

dudleya 

Island green 

dudleya 

Mexican 

flannelbush 

Los Angeles 

sunflower 

Mesa horkelia 

Coulter's 

goldfields 



Dithyrea maritima 

Dudleya multicaulis 

Dudleya virens ssp. 

insularis 

Fremontodendron 

mexicanum 

Helianthus nuttallii ssp. 

parishii 

Horkelia cuneata ssp. 

puberula 

Lasthenia glabrata 

ssp. coulteri 

Status 2 

Fed/CA/CNPS 

FED: None 

CA: ST 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: FE 

CA: Rare 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1A 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

Orcutt's linanthus Linanthus orcuttii FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

Mud nama Nama stenocarpum FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 2 

Spreading 

navarretia 

Prostrate 

navarretia 

Coast woollyheads 

California Orcutt 

grass 

Lyon's 

pentachaeta 

Navarretia fossalis 

Navarretia prostrata 

Nemacaulis denudata 

var. denudata 

Orcuttia californica 

Pentachaeta lyonii 

FED: FT 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: FE 

CA: SE 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: FE 

CA: SE 

CNPS: 1B 

Brand's phacelia Phacelia stellaris FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 


Coastal dunes, coastal scrub. 

Formerly more widespread in 

coastal habitats in Southern 

California. 

Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and 

foothill grassland. 

Coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub. 

Closed-cone coniferous forest, 

chaparral, cismontane woodland. 

Marshes and swamps (coastal salt 

and freshwater). Historical from 


Chaparral, cismontane woodland, 

coastal scrub. 

Coastal salt marshes, playas, valley 

and foothill grassland, vernal pools. 

Chaparral, lower montane 

coniferous forest. 

Marshes and swamps. 

Vernal pools, chenopod scrub, 

marshes and swamps, playas. 

Coastal scrub, valley and foothill 

grassland, vernal pools. 

Coastal dunes. 

Vernal pools. 

Chaparral, valley and foothill 

grassland. 

Coastal scrub, coastal dunes. 

Potential to 

Occur Onsite 

Low 

Low 

Low 

Absent 

Low 

Low 

Moderate 

Low 

Absent 

Moderate 

Low 

Absent 

Absent 

Low 

Low 

B-4 


Appendix B 


Common Name 


Status 2 

Fed/CA/CNPS 

Ballona cinquefoil Potentilla multijuga FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1A 

Parish's 

gooseberry 

Salt spring 

checkerbloom 

Ribes divaricatum var. 

parishii 

Sidalcea neomexicana 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 2 

Estuary seablite Suaeda esteroa FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 

San Bernardino 

aster 

Symphyotrichum 

defoliatum 

FED: None 

CA: None 

CNPS: 1B 


Meadows and seeps. 

Riparian woodland. 

Alkali playas, brackish marshes, 

chaparral, coastal scrub, lower 

montane coniferous forest, 

Mojavean desert scrub. 

Marshes and swamps. 

Meadows and seeps, marshes and 

swamps, coastal scrub, cismontane 

woodland, lower montane 

coniferous forest, grassland. 

Potential to 

Occur Onsite 

Low 

Absent 

Low 

Absent 

Absent 

CDFG SENSITIVE HABITATS 

California Walnut Woodland N/A N/A Absent 

Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest N/A N/A Absent 

Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub N/A N/A Absent 

Southern Coastal Salt Marsh N/A N/A Absent 

Southern Dune Scrub N/A N/A Absent 

Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian N/A N/A Absent 

Woodland 

Walnut Forest N/A N/A Absent 

Federal (FED) 

FE = Federally listed; Endangered 

FT = Federally listed, Threatened 

SC = Federal Species of Concern; not an active term, and is provided for informational purposes only. 

FPE = Federally Proposed for Listing as Endangered 

FPT = Federally Proposed for Listing as Threatened 

FC = Federal candidate species (former Category 1 candidates) 

State 

ST = State listed; Threatened 

SE = State listed; Endangered 

FP = Fully protected under the California Endangered Species Act 

SA = State Special Animal 

SC = California Species of Special Concern 

California Native Plant Society (CNPS) designations analyzed 

List 1A: Plants presumed extinct in California 

List 1B: Plants rare and endangered in California and throughout their range 

List 2: Plants rare, threatened or endangered in California but more common elsewhere in their range. 

* • Taxa that are biologically rare, very restricted in distribution, declining throughout their range, or at a critical stage in 

their life cycle when residing in California. 

• Population(s) in California that may be peripheral to the major portion of a taxon’s range, but which are threatened with 

extirpation within California. 

• Taxa closely associated with a habitat that is declining in California (e.g., wetland, riparian, old growth forest). 



Appendix C 

Facilities on LUFT List for the City 

of Inglewood

Appendix C 

Facilities on LUFT List for the City of Inglewood 


1 7-11 #24142 345 Manchester Blvd Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

2 76 Products Station #2156 400 Arbor Vitae St W Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

3 76 Products Station #3349 1430 La Brea Blvd N Waste Oil/Used Oil Open 

4 Abacus Roof Corp 715 Centinela Ave Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

5 Airline Coach Service 

636 South La Brea 

Avenue 

Waste Oil/Used Oil 

Open 

6 Airport Business Center 315 Glasgow Ave S Waste Oil/Used Oil Closed 

7 Allright Self Storage 808 La Brea Ave 

Aviation Gasoline And 

Additives 

Closed 

8 Arco #1360 1761 Centinela Ave Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

9 Arco #1360 1761 Centinela Ave. Gasoline/Automotive Open 

10 

Arco #9645/Former Thrifty 

Oil #251 

4130 Century Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Open 

11 Arco Products #09644 6500 S La Cienega Gasoline/Automotive Open 

12 Buffington Motors 440 Market St N Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

13 Cal National Guard Armory 111 Grosvenor St Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

14 Carmax 

355 South Glasgow 

Avenue 

Diesel Fuel Oil And Additives Open 

15 Centinela Hospital Med. Ctr. 622 La Brea Ave N 


Additives 

Open 

16 Century Mobil 1244 Inglewood Ave S Gasoline/Automotive Open 

17 Century Park Cleaners 3201 Century Blvd W 


Additives 

Closed 

18 Chevron 1358 Centinela Ave Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

19 Chevron # 9-0017 1300 Centinela Ave Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

20 Chevron #9-0017 1300 Centinela Ave Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

21 Chevron #9-1244 8409 8th Ave Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

22 Chevron #9-3829 303 Manchester Blvd W Waste Oil/Used Oil Closed 

23 Chevron #9-6594 2600 Manchester Blvd E Waste Oil/Used Oil Open 

24 Chevron #9-8503 11400 Crenshaw Blvd Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

25 

Chevron Service Station # 9- 

3829 

303 Manchester Blvd. W. 8006619,71432,Mtbe Open 

26 

City Of Inglewood Maint. 

Yard 

222 Beach Ave W Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

27 Colling Trust Property 9117 Aviation Blvd Hydrocarbons Open 

28 Collins Trust 9121 Aviation Blvd Hydrocarbons Closed 

29 Cypress Fee Pit 12001 Forum Rd Waste Oil/Used Oil Open 

30 Daniel Freeman Hospital 333 Prairie Ave N Diesel fuel oil and additives Closed 

31 Delorme Chevrolet 1175 La Brea Ave S Waste Oil/Used Oil Closed 

32 Dombrowski's Flowers 4940 Century Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

33 El Amin's Automotive Site 1001 Hyde Park Blvd E Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

34 Emery World Wide 3600 Century Blvd W Hydrocarbons Open 

35 Emery Worldwide 3600 Century Blvd W Diesel Fuel Oil And Additives Closed 

36 Exxon #7-2571 (Former) 3102 Century Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

37 Exxon #7-4181 633 Manchester Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

General Plan Technical Background Report C-1

Appendix C 



38 Family Of Faith Church 400 Florence Ave W Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

39 

Fast Fuel #77 / Texaco- 

Former 

3754 Imperial Hwy W Gasoline/Automotive Open 

40 Freight Forwarders (Formerly) 9107 Aviation Bl S Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

41 Fritz Foreign Service 

4501 West Century 

Boulevard 

Waste Oil/Used Oil 

Open 

42 Fujita Corporation 230 La Brea Ave. N. Gasoline/Automotive Open 

43 Global Gasoline 10800 S Prairie Ave Gasoline/Automotive Open 

44 Great Western Forum 3900 Manchester Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

45 Harry's Airport Garage 9131 Aviation Blvd S Gasoline/Automotive Open 

46 Holly Park Car Wash 3350 Century Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Open 

47 Inglewood Car Wash 320 La Brea Ave N Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

48 Inglewood Park Cemetery 720 Florence Ave E 


Additives 

Closed 

49 

Inglewood Redevelopment 

Agency 

3250 Century Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

50 Inglewood Transmission, Inc 4919 West Century Blvd Gasoline/Automotive Open 

51 Jim Lynch Cadillac 1213 Centinela Ave Waste Oil/Used Oil Closed 

52 Lax Equipment 

830 West Florence 

Avenue 

Diesel Fuel Oil And Additives Open 

53 Levine Family Trust 815 Hyde Park Ave W 

Aviation Gasoline and 

Additives 

Closed 

54 Lincoln Discount Tire 868 La Brea Ave S Waste Oil/Used Oil Closed 

55 Mobil #11-Apj 3016 Century Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Open 

56 Mobil #11-Kkx 8600 Crenshaw Blvd S Waste Oil/Used Oil Closed 

57 Mobil #18-Kkx 8600 Crenshaw Blvd S Hydrocarbons Closed 

58 Mobil #18-Len 8307 La Cienega Blvd S Gasoline/Automotive Open 

59 Mobil 18-Gj4 1007 La Brea Ave N Gasoline/Automotive Open 

60 P & M #0021 1100 Manchester Blvd W Hydrocarbons Open 

61 Park's Auto 4760 Imperial Hwy W Gasoline/Automotive Open 

62 Prince Chrysler Plymouth 1030 Manchester W Waste Oil/Used Oil Closed 

63 Ramar Industries 426 East 99th Street Gasoline/Automotive Open 

64 Rent A Car Cheap 4858 Century Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

65 Rho-Chem Corporation 425 Isis Ave Solvents Open 

66 Sears Auto Center (Former) 500 Manchester Blvd E Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

67 Shell 1135 Manchester Blvd W Waste Oil/Used Oil Open 

68 Shell Service Station 6800 Prairie Ave S Hydrocarbons Open 

69 Shell Service Station 804 Manchester Blvd W. 8006619, 76 MTBE Closed 

70 Simons Mini Market 501 Manchester Ave E Gasoline/Automotive Open 

71 Southern California Edison 8611 La Cienega Blvd Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

72 Sparling Buick 737 La Brea Ave N Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

73 Ss #23552 435 La Brea Ave N 


Additives 

Closed 

74 Texaco Gas Food Mart 1235 Centinela Ave Gasoline/Automotive Open 

C-2 


Appendix C 



75 Tire World (Former Arco) 920 Manchester Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Open 

76 Tosco - 76 Station #2365 8600 Aviation Blvd Gasoline/Automotive Open 

77 Tosco S.S. #2900 9830 Crenshaw Blvd S Gasoline/Automotive Open 

78 Toyota Of Inglewood 700 La Brea Ave S Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

79 

Transit Mixed Concrete 

Company 

505 Railroad Pl Diesel Fuel Oil And Additives Closed 

80 

Trustees Of The Highland 

Street Connection 

11950 Aviation Blvd. 8006619,13 Mtbe Closed 

81 United Oil #57 4520 Century Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Open 

82 Unocal #1923 145 Manchester Blvd E Waste Oil/Used Oil Closed 

83 Unocal #3145 3101 Imperial Hwy W Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

84 Unocal #3836 1740 Centinela Ave Waste Oil/Used Oil Closed 

85 Unocal #5050 (Former) 4000 Century Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

86 Unocal #5771 843 La Brea Ave S Gasoline/Automotive Closed 

87 Unocal #6370 4760 Century Blvd W Gasoline/Automotive Open 

88 Van's Shell #2 3107 Manchester Blvd W Hydrocarbons Open 

89 World Oil #15 740 Centinela Ave Gasoline/Automotive Open 

90 Your Man Tour 8831 Aviation Blvd Diesel Fuel Oil And Additives Closed 

SOURCE: LARWQCB LUFT List (http://geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov/search/) 

“Open” status indicates that the site is still under investigation and/or cleanup. 

“Closed” status indicates that no additional investigation or cleanup is required at the site at this time, but does not mean that 

the contamination has been remediated. 

General Plan Technical Background Report C-3

General Plan Update - City of Inglewood

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?