errata 1 palladium residences project final environmental impact … · 2015-11-06 · b. project...

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCHNo.2013081022 A‐1

ERRATA 1 PALLADIUM RESIDENCES PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

A. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1. INTRODUCTION

The City of Los Angeles (City) has prepared this Errata to provide additional information regarding thePalladium Residences Environmental Impact Report (EIR). It provides information regarding minorrevisions to the Project, clarifications and minor edits to the Draft and Final EIR documents, andsupplementaltechnicalanalyses.

The minor Project modifications, clarification, and supplemental information do not add significant newinformationtotheEIRorresultinmoreseveresignificantenvironmentalimpactsassociatedwiththeProjectanddonot require re‐circulationof theDraftEIR. TheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct (CEQA)onlyrequires recirculation of aDraft EIRwhen “significant new information” is added to aDraft EIR. Section15088.5oftheCEQAGuidelinesstatesthat“NewinformationaddedtoanEIRisnot‘significant’unlesstheEIRischangedinawaythatdeprivesthepublicofameaningfulopportunitytocommentuponasubstantialadverseenvironmentaleffectoftheprojectorafeasiblewaytomitigateoravoidsuchaneffect(includingafeasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement.” CEQAGuidelinesSection15088.5alsoprovidesthat“[r]ecirculationisnotrequiredwherethenewinformationaddedtotheEIRmerelyclarifiesoramplifiesormakesinsignificantmodificationsinanadequateEIR”

Changes to the Draft and Final EIR are indicated below under the respective EIR section heading, pagenumber,andparagraph.Paragraphreferenceistothefirstfullparagraphonthepage.Deletionsareshownwithstrikethroughandadditionsareshownwithunderline.

2. BACKGROUND

InaccordancewithSection15082oftheCEQAGuidelines,theCityofLosAngelespreparedandcirculatedaNoticeofPreparation(NOP)forpubliccommenttotheStateClearinghouse,OfficeofPlanningandResearch,responsibleagencies,andotherinterestedpartiesfora33‐dayreviewperiod,commencingAugust8,2013andendingSeptember9,2013. TheNOPformally informedthepublicthattheCitywaspreparingaDraftEIRfortheProject,andsolicitedinputregardingthescopeandcontentoftheenvironmentalinformationtobe included in the Draft EIR. In addition, a public scopingmeetingwas held on August 29, 2013 in theHollywoodPalladiumwithintheProjectSite.

Subsequently,aEIRwaspreparedandcirculated fora47‐daypublicreviewonOctober23,2014 throughDecember 8, 2014 in compliance with Section 15105(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines. A Final EIR thatincluded responses to comments on the Draft EIR and corrections and additions to the Draft EIR waspreparedanddistributedonMarch31,2014. TheFinalEIRincludescomments fromandresponsesto44

A. Introduction and Background November 2015

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCHNo.2013081022 A‐2

commenting parties including Public Agencies, Native American Organizations, Community OrganizationsandIndividualsandBusinesses.

Subsequent to completion of the Final EIR, the City of Los Angeles Hearing Officer, on behalf of the CityPlanningCommission,andtheDeputyAdvisoryAgencyconductedajointpublichearingonApril15,2015atwhich members of the public had an opportunity to present oral and written testimony regarding theProject. Based on this hearing, and public comments received, the Advisory Agency approved VestingTentativeTractMap(VTTM)No.72213fortheProjectonAugust6,2015.Thatdecisionwasappealed,andthose appeals included comments on the EIR. To address additional comments received, the ProjectApplicantproposescertainrefinementsoftheProject,whichwouldfurtherreduceProjectimpacts.

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCHNo.2013081022 B‐1

B. PROJECT REFINEMENTS

1. SELECTION BY THE LEAD AGENCY OF ALTERNATIVE 7 AS THE PROPOSED PROJECT

Chapter 2.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR describes the Project as it was initially proposed andanalyzedas“theProject”intheDraftEIR,Chapter4.0EnvironmentalAnalysisandChapter6.0,OtherCEQAConsideration.TheDraftEIRalsoincludedanalysisofseven(7)ProjectAlternativesinChapter5.0.Oneofthese,Alternative7,AlternativeSiteDesign–EnhancedSetbacks,wasdeterminedintheDraftEIRtobetheEnvironmentally Superior Alternative. Alternative 7 also received favorable public comments, asdocumentedintheFinalEIR.OnthebasisofAlternative7’sreducedenvironmentalimpactsandfavorablepubliccomments,thePlanningStaffReporttotheAdvisoryAgencyrecommendedapprovalofAlternative7andtheAdvisoryAgency’sdeterminationapprovedaVestingTentativeTractMapforAlternative7.

Alternative 7 is substantially similar to the initially proposed Project. Most notably it includes the samedevelopment program, general building location and design, and entitlement requests as the initiallyproposed Project. It also includes implementation of the same Mitigation Monitoring and ReportingProgram, including thePalladiumPreservationandEnhancementPlan,asdescribed in theFinalEIR. TheAlternative7variationsfromtheinitiallyproposedProjectarerelatedtominormodificationsinthemassingofthebuildingsandsubterraneanparkingtoreducecertainProjectimpacts.

Alternative 7’smodified design includes reducing the subterranean parking to amaximum of four levelsinsteadofseven,whichreducesexcavationandassociatedconstructionimpacts;proposesagreatersetbackfromSelmaAvenuefortheProject’snortherlytower,whichimproveseast‐westviewsovertheProjectSite;slightlynarrowstheProject’snewbuildingsbehindthePalladium,providinggreaterbufferspacebetweenthenewconstructionandthePalladium;andpushesbackbyapproximately25feetthepodiumbehindthePalladium,making approximately 2,000 square feet of pedestrian space open to the skywithin El CentroCourt.Theedgesofthetallerbuildingelementswouldalsobefurtherrecessed/setback,withacurvilineararchitecturalgridthatarticulatesoutwardfromtheunitswithusableoutdoorbalconyspaceinter‐stitchedbetween. Thearticulatedgridand interstitialbalconieswouldnotreadasasolidwall,butas transitionalelementsincontrastwithsolidbuildingfacades.Alternative7alsoincreasedtheheightofthetallerbuildingelementsasinitiallyproposedandanalyzedintheDraftEIRfrom28storiesand350feetinheighttoupto30storiesand395feetinheight,toaccommodatespacelostduetotheAlternative’sgreatersetbacks.

2. PROPOSED REFINEMENTS TO ALTERNATIVE 7

Baseduponfurthercommunitycomment,andinresponsetocommentsraisedintheappealsoftheAugust6,2015,VTTMdetermination,theApplicanthasproposedfurtherrefinementstotheAlternative7Projectasfollows:

ReducedHeights: ThemaximumbuildingheightunderAlternative7hasbeenreducedfromamaximumof395 feet to amaximumof 350 feet. The reduction in theheight ofAlternative7results in reduced impacts on aesthetics as compared to those discussed in the Alternative 7analysisonpage5‐133oftheDraftEIR.Alternative7’simpactsonaesthetics,viewsandshadingassociatedwithbuildingheightwouldnowbethesameasreportedintheEIRfortheproposedProject.

B. Project Refinements November 2015

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCHNo.2013081022 B‐2

EliminationofHotelOption:TheDraftandFinalEIRanalyzedtwoProjectOptions–Option1,Residential,with731residentialunitsandapproximately24,000squarefeetofretail,andOption2,Residential/Hotel,with598residentialunitsanda250roomhotelwithrelatedhotelfacilitiesandapproximately24,000square feetof retail. Givenrecent requests forclarityandcertaintyabouttheProject’suses,andthedevelopmentandproposalofmanyotherhotelsinHollywood,the Project Applicant has decided to proceed with the residential ‐ only, Option 1 that wasanalyzedintheDraftandFinalEIR,andwillnotpursueahotelcomponent.

The Necessary Approvals on page 2‐23, of the Draft EIR, Section 2.0 Project Description havebeenmodifiedtodeletetheentitlementrequestpertainingtohoteluses.Eliminationofthehoteluses from theProject reduces the impacts identified for theProject in theDraft andFinalEIR.Most notably, these include reduced operational traffic impacts (three intersections would nolongerhavesignificantimpactswitheliminationofOption2,wouldbereducedfromfivetothreeintersections, and residential street segments would no longer be significantly impacted);reducedoperationalimpactsonairquality,greenhousegasemissionsandnoiseassociatedwithtraffic;andreducedutility impacts, includingwaterconsumption,wastewatergeneration, solidwastegeneration,andenergyconsumption.ImpactsondemandforPoliceserviceswouldalsobeslightlyreduced.

UpdatedEntitlementRequests: TheNecessaryActionsrequiredtoimplementandentitletheProjectarelistedinSection2.GoftheProjectDescriptiononpages2‐22to2‐23oftheDraftEIRandmodifiedthroughCorrectionsandAdditionsonpage2‐29oftheFinalEIR.Modificationstotheseentitlementsareasfollows:

o DeletionofaConditionalUsePermittoallowFloorAreaAveragingandResidentialDensityTransfer.ThisisreplacedwithanewProjectDesignFeature(PDF)PDF‐LandUse‐1thathasbeenaddedtotheLandUseSectionaspartoftheCorrectionsandAdditionsbelow.ThePDFwillbe implementedasaconditionofProjectApprovaland is included in theMMRP. ThischangeisalsodescribedinthisErratainSectionD.2onpageD‐2.

o DeletionofthehotelusesintheConditionalUsePermitforthesaleofalcoholicbeverages.

o DeletionoftherequestforConditionalUsePermitforahotelintheC4zonewithin500feetofanRzone.

ThemodificationstotheentitlementrequestsdonotchangetheProjectoritsimpactsontheenvironment.TheyprovideclarificationsregardingProjectimplementation.

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCHNo.2013081022 C‐1

C. ADDITIONAL EIR INFORMATION

1. AESTHETICS AND VIEWS

AnevaluationofthecommentsconcerningaestheticsandviewsreceivedafterreleaseoftheFinalEIRandduring the public hearing process determined that the comments raised are similar to or the same ascomments already addressed in the Final EIR and that the responses provided in the Final EIR fullyaddressedthecommentsregardingtheProject’saestheticimpactsandtheProject’sviewimpactsincludedintheDraftEIR.

2. AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

AIR QUALITY

Comments regarding air quality and greenhouse gas emissionswere received for the first time after thepublicationof theFinalEIRandduring thepublichearingprocess. Oneof thecommentspertains tonewrecommendations for the methodology used for performing Health Risk Assessments. This comment isaddressedbelow.AsecondcommentaddressestheProject’sanalysisoflocalizeddispersionimpacts.Thiscomment is also addressed below. Otherwise, upon an evaluation of these comments, it has beendeterminedthat theDraftEIRhasproperlyanalyzedthesetopicsandtheDraftEIRhasusedtherequiredmethodology for such analyses. Based on these comments and the further analyses discussed below, nosignificantimpactsbeyondthoseidentifiedintheDraftEIRwouldoccur.

New Health Risk Assessment based on March 2015 California Office of Environmental Health and

Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Guidelines.

InMarch2015,astheFinalEIRwasbeingpreparedforpublicationOEHHAadoptednewguidelineswhichupdatedthepreviousguidanceforpreparingHealthRiskAssessments(HRAs)undertheState’sAirToxics“Hot Spots” Program Risk Assessment program by incorporating advances in risk assessment withconsideration of infants and children using Age Sensitivity Factors (ASF). These changes also take intoaccount different breathing rates and time spent at home. On June 5, 2015, SCAQMD incorporated theupdatedOEHHAguidelinesintoitsapplicablerulesthatapplytocertainstationarysourcesregulatedundertheHot Spots program. The SCAQMDhas not yet released guidance on the applicability of the updatedOEHHA guidelines for preparing CEQA documents. Nonetheless, even though SCAQMD has notrecommended using the update OEHHA guidelines for preparing HRAs in CEQA documents, to beconservative, an analysis was performed using these guidelines, which is included as a TechnicalMemorandumincludedasAppendixB‐2ofErrata1.

TheCorrectionsandAdditionsbelowalso incorporatethissupplementalanalysis intotheEIR. Undertherevisedanalysistheincrementalincreaseinhealthriskfromconstructionwouldbe6.5inonemillion,whichis less than thesignificance thresholdof10 inonemillionand therefore less thansignificant. Asaresult,health risk impacts from Project construction would be less than significant under the updated OEHHAmethodologyforstationarysources.

As the 2015 OEHHA guidelines are more sensitive to the protection of the public safety than previousguidelines,additionalconstructionmeasuresarerequiredtomeettheupdatedriskestimates.Aspartoftheon‐goinganalysis,theProjectDesignFeaturethatwaspreviouslyrecommendedfortheprotectionofpublic

C. Additional EIR Information November 2015


healthhasbeenrevised.TheupdatesincorporatetheuseofCARB/USEPATier4standardsinlieuoftheTier3 standards, and increaseduseof electric constructionequipment.TheupdatedPDF‐GHG‐1nowreadsasfollows:

PDF‐GHG‐1: Construction Measures: The Project shall utilize off‐road diesel‐poweredconstructionequipment thatmeetor exceed theCARBandUSEPATier3Tier4off‐roademissionsstandards for thoseequipment ratedat50hporgreaterduring thegrading,concretepouringandbuildingconstructionphasesofProjectconstruction.Polepower(electricitydeliveredfromtheutilitygrid)shallbetheprimarysourceofpowerforusewithon‐siteelectrictools,equipment,lighting,etc.,exceptwhere/wheninfeasibleduetositeconstraints;dieselgenerators,ifneeded,shallberatedbetween75 horsepower (hp) and 750 hp andmeet or exceed applicable Tier 4 standards.Total diesel generator usage during construction shall not exceed 312,000horsepower‐hours.Cranesandconcretepumpsshallbeelectrifiedwithpolepower.TheProjectshallutilizeon‐roadhaultrucksthatmeetorexceedthemodelyear2010emission standards. These requirements shall be included in applicable biddocumentsandsuccessfulcontractor(s)mustdemonstratetheabilitytosupplysuchequipment. A copy of each unit’s certified tier specification or model yearspecificationandCARBorSCAQMDoperatingpermit(ifapplicable)shallbeavailableuponrequestatthetimeofmobilizationofeachapplicableunitofequipment.

The Draft EIR determined that Project operations would result in an incremental cancer risk ofapproximately3.6inonemillion.whichislessthanthe10inonemillionsignificancethreshold.Theprimarycontributor to the risk was emissions from restaurant charbroiling. The operational HRA assesseduncontrolled TAC emissions from charbroiling. However, restaurant charbroiling would comply withSCAOMDRule1138 (ControlofEmissions fromRestaurantOperations),which requires the installationofemissions controls on charbroilers in use in the Air Basin. The cancer risk from Project operations withcharbroileremissionscontrolsinplacewouldbe0.7inonemillion.

WhentakingintoaccounttheagesensitivityandupdatedexposurefactorsunderthenewOEHHAguidanceforstationarysources,thecancerriskfromProjectoperationswithcharbroileremissionscontrolsinplacewouldbe2.0inonemillion,whichislessthanthe10inonemillionsignificancethreshold.Asaresult,healthriskimpactsfromProjectoperationwouldbelessthansignificantunderthenewOEHHAmethodologyforstationarysources.

Subsequent Dispersion Modeling

SubsequenttopublicationoftheFinalEIR,acommentwasreceivedsuggestingthattheProject’sanalysisoflocalized emission levels were not properly calculated. The argument asserted that the significancethresholdswerebasedonlotsizeandtheProject’s3.6acresitehadahigherthresholdthanasmallersiteexclusiveof thePalladiumwouldhavehad. The3.6acreSitesizeandmethodologyemployedintheDraftEIRarecorrect.(CommentsregardingtheProject’slotsizeandsitedensitywereaddressedintheFinalEIR.FurtherdiscussionoftheProject’slotconfigurationanddensityareaddressedintheLandUsediscussionofthis Additional EIR Information Section below.) However, in order to address the comment furtherassessmentoflocalizedemissionshavebeenperformed.ThesubsequentstudywasbasedonarefinedLSTanalysisusingdispersionmodelingpursuantSCAQMDguidelines.Forillustrativepurposes,modelingusing

November 2015 C. Additional EIR Information


theAERMODdispersionmodelprimarilyevaluatedthepotentiallocalizedconstructionimpactsonthe1.87acresareaoftheProjectSite,exclusiveoftheareainwhichthePalladiumbuildingislocated.Theanalysistakesintoaccountandaddressesimpactsatthenearestsensitivereceptorswhetherexistingoridentifiedasfuturedevelopment.ThefullanalysisisprovidedinaTechnicalMemorandumincludedinAppendixB‐3ofErrata1.

Theresultsoftheanalysis indicatethat forNO2andCO, localizedconstructionemissionsfromtheProjectwouldnotcauseanexceedanceoftheNAAQSorCAAQSatexistingorfuturesensitivereceptors.LocalizedconstructionemissionsfromtheProjectwouldresultinamaximumincrementalincreaseofapproximately1.3µg/m3forPM10andapproximately0.7µg/m3forPM2.5,atsensitivereceptors,whichwouldnotexceedthesignificancethresholdof10.4µg/m3.Asaresult,thelocalizedconstructionimpactswouldbelessthansignificant,forthisanalysisaswellasthepreviouslypreparedanalysis.

The results of the analysis for operational localized NO2 and CO emissions (including from the vehiclesenteringandexitingtheproposedparkingstructure)wouldnotcauseanexceedanceoftheNAAQSorCAAQSat existing or future sensitive receptors. Emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 would result in a maximumincremental increase of 2.18 µg/m3 at sensitive receptors, which would not exceed the operationalsignificance threshold of 2.5 µg/m3. As a result, the localized operational impacts would be less thansignificant.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS (GHG)

OnApril29,2015,subsequenttopublicationoftheFinalEIR,CaliforniaGovernorBrownissuedExecutiveOrderB‐30‐15. Therein,GovernorBrownestablishedanew interimstatewidereduction target to reduceGHGemissions to40percentbelow1990 levelsby2030;orderedall stateagencieswith jurisdictionoversourcesofGHGemissionstoimplementmeasurestoachievereductionsofGHGemissionstomeetthe2030and2050reduction targets;anddirectedCARBtoupdate theClimateChangeScopingPlan toexpress the2030targetintermsofmillionmetrictonsofcarbondioxideequivalent. CARBsubsequentlyexpresseditsintention to initiate the Climate Change Scoping Plan update during the summer of 2015, with adoptionscheduledfor2016.

TheCorrectionsandAdditionssupplementtheGHGanalysisintheDraftEIR.ThesupplementalinformationdoesnotalterthepreviousconclusionsoftheDraftEIRthatProjectimpactsonGHGemissionswouldbelessthansignificant. Thesupplementary information is included in theCorrectionsandAdditionsSectionandAppendicesbelow.Thesupplementalinformationincludesthefollowing:

NewregulatorydiscussionregardingExecutiveOrderB‐30‐15andtheCapandTradeProgram

RevisionstothediscussionofthemethodologyforevaluatingGHGemissionsimpacts;

Revisions to the Significance Thresholds based on CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3) inresponsetoSB97;

AddedanalysesintheevaluationofProjectimpactsregardingconsistencywithGreenhouseGasReductionPlanstoaddresstheconsistencyoftheProjectwithExecutiveOrdersS‐3‐05andB‐30‐15;



AdditionalinformationregardingcumulativeimpactsinlightofCEQASection15064(h)(3);and

AppendixBoftheDraftEIRwasfurthersupplementedwithinformationfromCAPCOAguidancetosupportthediscussionofthelandusetransportationmeasuresthatwouldreduceProjectVMTasdiscussedunderthepresentationoftheProjectCharacteristicsthatreduceVMT(seeAppendixB‐1ofthisErrata).

3. CULTURAL RESOUCES – ARCHAELOGICAL RESOURCES

Comments regarding impacts on archaeological resources were received for the first time after thepublication of the Final EIR. Upon evaluation of the comments, it has been determined that the EIR hasproperly analyzed the Project’s potential impacts on such resources and provided appropriatemitigationmeasures for theirprotection. However, asa response to these comments, theCorrectionsandAdditionsbelowincludearevisiontoMitigationMeasureMM‐ARCH‐1relatingtothepreparationofanArchaeologicalResourceMitigationPlan(ARMP).

4. CULTURAL RESOURCES – HISTORIC RESOURCES

An evaluation of the comments concerning historic resources received after release of the Final EIR andduring thepublic hearingprocesswas conductedby thehistoric resources consultant,HistoricResourcesGroup(HRG).Basedonthisevaluation,HRGdeterminedthatthecommentsraisedaresimilartoorthesameasthosecommentsalreadyaddressedintheFinalEIRandthattheresponsesprovidedintheFinalEIRfullyaddressed the comments regarding the Project’s historic resources impacts and the Project’s historicresourcesassessmentincludedintheDraftEIR.

SubsequenttopublicationoftheFinalEIR,whichcontainedadditionalhistoricanalysisandtwonewProjectDesign Features regarding the Palladium Preservation and Enhancement Plan andHistoric InterpretativeExhibit,theStateOfficeofHistoricPreservation(OHP)publisheditsJune2015CEQACaseStudies,VolumeIV (the “Case Study”). (The Case Study is included as Appendix A‐1 of this Errata 1.) The Case StudyreviewedthePalladiumResidencesProject,asconfirmedinanOctober14,2015emailfromSeandeCourcy,StateHistorianIIwiththeLocalGovernment&EnvironmentalComplianceUnittoHistoricResourcesGroup(correspondenceincludedinAppendixA‐1ofthisErrata1).TheCaseStudystatesthattheProjectproposedahistoricrehabilitationtreatmentplan intheFinalEIR,whichtogetherwiththeProject’sdesign“ensuredfiveaspectsofthebuilding’shistoricintegritywouldremainintactdespitesomeimpacttothebuildings[sp]historicsettingandfeeling.”TheCaseStudy’sanalysisconcludesbystating:

“Given the project objectives of 1) increased density and 2) preservation/continued use of thehistoricbuilding,thisapproachseemslikereasonablemeansforensuringimpactstothebuildingarelessthansignificant.

Local government planners and preservation advocates should work with project proponentsthrough the local preservation review process, and/or the CEQA process to incorporate historicresourcesintoinfilldevelopmentdesign.Thecollaborativeapproach,exemplifiedbythisCaseStudy,hasthepotentialtoinspiremoresustainableinfilldesignwhenhistoricresourcesareinvolved.”

InconfirmingthatthisCaseStudywasofthePalladiumResidencesProject,theauthornotedthat“Whilewedon’tcallouttheprojectbyname,weappreciatedthewaytheLeadAgencyincorporatedOHP’scomments



into the final environmental document and wanted to share this example with other Lead Agencies.”(Appendix A) Based on OHP’s analysis of the Project provided in this Case Study, and the subsequentcommunication (both included in the Appendix), OHP has provided no further objections to the historicimpactanalysisasitissupplementedintheFinalEIR.

Subsequent topublicationof theFinalEIR, theProjectapplicantalsocontinuedon‐goingdiscussionswithhistoric stakeholders thathave led to further refinementsof theProject’shistoricProjectDesignFeaturesandproposedzoningconditionsofapproval.

Changes to the Project’s historic Project Design Features include minor clarifications, as well as theadditional requirement that a draft Palladium Preservation and Enhancement Plan be submitted toHollywoodHeritageinadditiontoCityPlanning’sOfficeofHistoricResources.

ChangesmadetotheProject’sQConditionsandDLimitationsincludethefollowing:

In theevent that theapplicantdoesnotnominate thePalladiumasrequired, theapplicantwillnotopposeanyotherentityfromnominatingthePalladium;

TheapplicantagreesthatalldevelopmentdensityfromthePalladiumbuildingsitewillbeusedforaprojectdevelopedonadjacentproperty,andshallnotbeusedtoredevelopthePalladiumbuildingsite;and

The applicant agrees that the development rights for the site shall only be for repair orreconstructionofthePalladiumbuildingintheeventofdamageorloss,unlessit isdeterminedthatrestoration/reconstructionofthebuildingisimpractical.

AnyprojectwithanFARofbetween4.5:1andnot toexceed6.0:1 requiresOHRapprovalof ahistoricimpactanalysis.

The updates to the Project Design Features and proposed zoning conditions for the Project provideadditional protections for theHollywoodPalladium, and therefore are consistentwith thehistoric impactanalysisprovidedintheDraftandFinalEIR.ThetwohistoricProjectDesignFeaturesandthreeProjectSitezoning conditions are now proposed as follows (to see the changesmade in strikeout and underline seeSectionD‐2onpageD‐3below):

PDF‐HIST‐1:PalladiumPreservationandEnhancementPlan.TheApplicantshallcontributetothepreservationandenhancementofthePalladiumthroughimprovementstobeselectedat theApplicant’s election, including from the following list of potential improvements,providedthattheproposedimprovementtobeimplementedmustbe(1)selectedbytheApplicantasapriority improvementandapprovedby its tenant for thePalladium, (2)approvedbytheDepartmentofCityPlanning’sOfficeofHistoricResources(“OHR”)and(3) in compliancewith the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, ascertified by a qualified historic preservation consultantwho shallmonitorwork underthePalladiumPreservationandEnhancementPlanforconformancewiththeStandards.



A. Timing. A draft Palladium Preservation and Enhancement Plan proposed by theApplicant shall be submitted to Hollywood Heritage and OHR no later than 30calendar days prior to any design review required from same and prior to theissuance of building permits for the Project, which will include identification ofcharacter‐definingfeaturesandthesignificanceofsuchfeatures.AfinalPlanshallbeapprovedbyOHRpriorto issuanceof finalcertificatesofoccupancyfortheProject.At the Applicant’s option, earlier review by OHRmay be requested such as duringschematicdesignanddesigndevelopment.AnHistoricStructureReportshallalsobepreparedinconjunctionwiththefinalPreservationandEnhancementPlan.

B. PotentialElements for Inclusion.The following includesa list ofproposedpotentialimprovements to be considered for inclusionin the Palladium Preservation andEnhancementPlan.Thislistisbased,inpart,onsurveysofthePalladiumconductedby Historic Resources Group, which prepared the Project’s Historic ResourcesAssessment Report and conducted a prior historic review of the Palladium inconjunction with the Palladium’s 2008 rehabilitation. This list is also based onimprovementsrecommendedincommentlettersontheDraftEIR,aswellasneededfunctional improvements to the Palladium’s operations, to ensure that it remains afirst‐class entertainment venue. Prior to construction of any improvements, theApplicant shall propose those improvements it determines to be priorityimprovementsandseektoobtaintheapprovalsreferencedinitems1,2and3ofthefirstparagraphabove.

– ImprovethePalladium’sexistingback‐stagespace,back‐of‐houseservice,andloadingoperations,whichdonotmeetcurrentperformanceandproductionneeds‐replacethe 2008 addition on the northern side of the Palladium, and potentially thepreviouslyaltered,originalextensioninthesamelocation,withsubterraneanand/oroverhead bridge connections to the new building on the north side. Additionally,relocate the existing outdoor truck loading area to a subterranean level; withsubterranean access from Argyle and Selma Avenues. These enhancements wouldprovide additional staging areas for the Palladium’s operations within the newbuilding; improve loading operations; eliminate any potential pedestrian‐vehicularconflictsonElCentroAvenue;andprovidesubstantiallymoreopenspaceontherearsideofthePalladiumforwalkingandgathering;

– Improve accessibility to, and utilization of, the Palladium’s existing southernstorefront spaces, better integrate the storefront spaceswith the proposedProject,and improve queuing – provide doors and potential window openings within thePalladium’swesternwalltoconnectpedestriansfromSunsetCourttothePalladium’sstorefronts;

– Prepare a design program for the Palladium’s existing southern storefront spaces.The nonstructural storefront partitions on the southern façade of the PalladiumbuildingwerealteredpriortothePalladium’s2008rehabilitationproject,andwerenotuniformorcharacter‐defining.The2008rehabilitation fundedbyCRAremovednon‐character‐defining features, reconstructed missing original features, and builtnew features such as storefronts that are compatible with the historic building.Similartotheintentandimplementationofthe2008rehabilitation,adesignprogram



for these storefronts will include a uniform set of components that provide for acoherentdesignamongthedifferentstorefrontbayswhileallowingforlayoutoptionsthatmeettheneedsoftenants,forinstanceallowingalterationsofthelocationsandnumbersofdoors,windows,andmullions;

– Prepareahistoricallycompatiblesignageplan for thePalladium’sexistingsouthernstorefrontspaces,potentiallyincludingsuchelementsassigndimensionsandoptionsformaterials,construction,illumination,colors,andfinishes.Historicallytherehavebeen many different styles and types of tenant signage used on the building, andconsiderationwillbegiventohistoricsignagedesignprecedentsthataredocumentedin archival photographs of the Palladium when designing new signage for thestorefronts.Howeversignagemayormaynotbeneeded for theexistingstorefrontspaces;

– FlushopaqueentrancelobbydoorsonSunsetandArgyle‐Replacewithfullyglazeddoors that recall original design documented in the original Gordon Kaufmanndrawings;

– Ballroomceiling‐Repairandreplacetexturedacousticalplasterasneeded;

– Ballroomfloor‐Stripping,screening,varnishing,andwaxingona10yearcycle;

– Lobbyfinish,lighting,andrestoration‐Installcompatiblesconces,wallcovering,andcarpet;

– Public toilets – Remove and reinstall clean, durable multiple‐accommodationfacilities;

– Ballroomchandeliers‐Dustandwashglass;reducecorrosionandwaxmetalona10yearcycle;

– Woodroofframing‐Annualinspectionandlocaltreatmentbylicensedexterminator

– Metalflashings,fasciae,hardware‐Maintenanceoffinishesandoperatingpartsona10yearcycle;

– ExteriorWalls‐Maintenanceofpaintedsurfacesona10yearcycle;

– Neon and specialty signage and lighting ‐ Maintenance of ballasts, tubes, boxes,shields,facesona10yearcycle;

– HVACsystem‐Engineeringandreplacementofmajorcomponentsona15yearcycle;

– Roof‐Replacementona20yearcycle;

– Toilet fixtures, fittings,&accessories ‐Replacementofheavyuse toilet componentsona10yearcycle.

PDF‐HIST‐2:Historic InterpretiveExhibit.AnHistoric InterpretiveExhibit shallbe incorporatedinto the Project at key locations to increase general public and patron awareness andappreciationofthehistoryandsignificanceofHollywoodandtheHollywoodPalladium.Theexhibitshallprovideinformativevisualdisplaysand/ormediathatmayaddresssuchtopicsas:thebuilding’sarchitecturalstyleandarchitect;identificationofotherhistoricalbuildingsintheProjectvicinityandtheirrelationshiptothePalladium;useoftheProjectSiteprior to constructionof thePalladiumand thehistoricHollywoodcontext; and the



layersofhistoryatthesite:agriculture,motionpictureindustry,musicalrecording, liveentertainment, radio, and television. The display shall be designed and implementedpursuanttoinputfromHollywoodstakeholders.TheHistoricInterpretiveExhibitmaybelocated within the Palladium building itself, or as an outdoor interpretive programreviewed and approved by the Office of Historic Resources. The Historic InterpretiveExhibitwillnotbehousedinseparatenewconstructionappendedtotheexteriorofthePalladiumbuilding.

ModifiedQCondition1:

In theevent thataprojectadjacent to theHollywoodPalladium theatrebuilding locatedat6201SunsetBoulevard isapprovedatadensityof6.0:1FAR,andprovided thatall administrativeandlegalappealsandchallengeshavebeenresolvedpermittingaprojectwithadensityof6.0:1FAR,then prior to issuance of building permits for such project, the applicant shall nominate theHollywoodPalladiumtheatrebuildingasaHistoric‐CulturalMonumentinaccordancewiththeLosAngeles Cultural Heritage Ordinance, Municipal Code Sections. 22.171 et seq. In the event theapplicant does not nominate the Hollywood Palladium theatre building as a Historic‐CulturalMonument,theapplicantwillnotopposeanyotherentitynominatingthebuildingasanHistoricalCulturalMonument.TheapplicantrecognizesthatSec.511oftheHollywoodRedevelopmentPlanstates that “[t]he [CommunityRedevelopment] Agency shall deny requests for housing incentiveunits, development in the Regional Center Commercial designation above an F.A.R. of 4.5:1 andvariationsforsitesonwhichastructuredeterminedbytheAgencytobesignificantwasdemolishedafter the adoption of this Plan or is proposed to be demolished; however, under exceptionalcircumstances where a significant structure has been substantially damaged and must bedemolishedduetocircumstancesbeyondthecontroloftheowner,theAgencymaygrantrequestsforhousingincentiveunits,developmentwithintheRegionalCenterCommercialdesignationabovean F.A.R. of 4.5:1 and variations.” The applicant agrees that all development density from thePalladiumbuildingsitewillbeusedforaprojectdevelopedonadjacentproperty,andshallnotbeusedtoredevelopthePalladiumbuildingsite,whichdevelopmentrightsshallonlybeforrepairorreconstructionofthePalladiumbuildingintheeventofdamageorloss,unlessitisdeterminedthatrestoration/reconstructionofthebuildingisimpractical.


Prior to theDepartmentofCityPlanning’s sign‐off onbuildingpermits for aprojectwitha6.0:1FARdirectlyadjacenttothePalladium,theDepartmentofPlanning,inconsultationwithitsOfficeofHistoric Resources shall confirm that the project’s building plans substantially conform to theconceptual planspresented anddescribed in theEnvironmental ImpactReport and approvedbytheCityofLosAngeles.

ModifiedDLimitations:

Aprojecton this sitemaybedevelopedat aFloorAreaRatio (FAR)ofbetween4.5:1andnot toexceed6.0:1providedthat:

a. The Community Redevelopment Agency, any successor to the CommunityRedevelopmentAgency, or theDepartmentofCityPlanningofLosAngelespursuant tothe transferbyordinanceof redevelopment landuseplansand functions to theCityofLos Angeles (C.F. No. 12‐0014‐S4), finds that the project conforms to the Hollywood



RedevelopmentPlanwithfindingsasrequiredbySec.506.2.3oftheRedevelopmentPlanandapprovesanOwnerParticipationAgreement;and

b. Theproject’shistoricanalysisisapprovedbytheOfficeofHistoricResources,theprojectisapprovedbytheCityPlanningCommission,ortheCityCouncilonappeal,pursuanttotheproceduressetforthinLAMC12.32D.

5. LAND USE

Comments raised on the topic of Land Use received after release of the Final EIR and during the publichearing process have already been addressed and responded to in the Final EIR. However, additionalinformationisprovidedbelowregardingcommentsreceivedontheHollywoodRedevelopmentPlanandtheProject’srequestedConditionalUsePermitforFloorAreaAveraging.

The Hollywood Redevelopment Plan

CommentssubmittedduringthepublichearingprocessregardingtheHollywoodRedevelopmentPlanandthesuccessoragencytotheCommunityRedevelopmentAgency(CRA/LA)werereviewedandaresimilartopreviouscommentsthatwereaddressedintheFinalEIR.However,additionalinformationregardingProjectconsistencywiththeHollywoodRedevelopmentPlanisprovidedbelow.

While redevelopment agencieshavebeendissolved, theHollywoodRedevelopmentPlan remains in effectuntil 2033. Pursuant to the legislation dissolving redevelopment agencies, the successor agency orDesignated Local Authority (DLA) is obligated to carry out theHollywoodRedevelopment Plan until thatdate.Additionally,theDLAhastheauthorityto,amongotherthings,makethefindingsrequiredtoallowforthe Project’s increase in floor area ratio ("FAR") of up to 6.0:1, as well as enter into a binding writtenagreement–justastheformerredevelopmentagencywasableto.

On June 21, 2012, the DLA adopted a resolution clarifying the land use provisions of Section 502 of theHollywoodRedevelopment Plan and theRedevelopment Plan in relation to the land use approvals of theGeneralPlan,CommunityPlan,andZoningOrdinance.Specifically,theDLAadoptedaresolutionstatingthat,“anylandusespermittedforsuchpropertybytheapplicableprovisionsoftheCityofLosAngelesGeneralPlan,CommunityPlanandZoningOrdinance,allastheyexistorarehereafteramendedorsupplantedfromtimetotime,shallbepermittedlandusesforallpurposesunderthe[HollywoodRedevelopmentPlan].”TheDLAexplainedthatthisactionwasnecessary“togiveeffecttotheprovisionssetforthinSection502ofthe[HollywoodRedevelopmentPlan].”

TheDraftEIRatTable4.H‐4,andFinalEIRatpages2‐36through2‐37,describetheProject’sconsistencywiththeHollywoodRedevelopmentPlan’sSection506.2.3,findingsrequiredfordevelopmentuptoa6.0:1FAR.SincepublicationoftheFinalEIR,theProjectapplicanthasalsoinitiatedanapplicationwiththeDLAfor an Owner Participation Agreement, pursuant to its letter dated September 20, 2015 (included asAppendixD‐1ofthisErrata).

Additionally, the DLA issued a letter dated November 3, 2015 (included as Appendix D‐2 of this Errata)confirming that it has monitored the FAR of Regional Center Commercial designated areas within theRedevelopmentPlanarea,asrequiredbySection506.2.3of theRedevelopmentPlan. TheDLAconfirmed



that the average FAR within these areas is approximately 1.5:1 FAR, less than the average of 4.5:1 FARrequired under the Redevelopment Plan. Therefore, the Project’s requested density of 6.0:1 FAR ispermittedundertheRedevelopmentPlan.

The followingtechnicaledit to theProject’szoningD limitation isalsoproposedtoremoveanyambiguitythata6.0:1FARispermittedundertheProjectSite’szoning;thiseditwouldnotpermitalargerProjectorgreaterFARthanpreviouslyproposedoranalyzedintheProject’sEIR.

ModifiedDLimitation:

AprojectonthissitemaybedevelopedataFloorAreaRatio(FAR)ofbetween4.5:1andnottoexceed6.0:1providedthat:

a. TheCommunityRedevelopmentAgency,anysuccessortotheCommunityRedevelopmentAgency,or the Department of City Planning of Los Angeles pursuant to the transfer by ordinance ofredevelopmentlanduseplansandfunctionstotheCityofLosAngeles(C.F.No.12‐0014‐S4),findsthattheprojectconformstotheHollywoodRedevelopmentPlanwithfindingsasrequiredbySec.506.2.3oftheRedevelopmentPlanandapprovesanOwnerParticipationAgreement;

Withdrawal of Request for Conditional Use Permit for Floor Area Averaging and Residential Density Averaging

TheProjectpreviously includedarequest foraConditionalUsePermit forFloorAreaAveraging,which ispermittedbytheLosAngelesMunicipalCodeforunifieddevelopmentprojects.TheProjectSiteconsistsoftwo lots, however the entire Sitewill operate, look, and feel like one unified development. The Project’sfunctional linkages include pedestrian and vehicular connections, common architecture, landscape andtreatment of outdoor space, and complementary and connected program elements. Working togetherseamlessly, theProjectSitepresentsasa consolidatedwhole fromadjacent streets. Thus, this request isappropriate and permitted by the Los Angeles Municipal Code, as discussed in detail in the Project’sapplicationsandonpage3.B‐41oftheFinalEIR.

Nonetheless,inresponsetopubliccomments,theProjectapplicanthasagreedtowithdrawtherequestforFloor Area and Residential Density Averaging. Instead, prior to issuance of building permits, the ProjectapplicantwilleithertietheProject’stwolots,orrecordafinalmapoftheProject’sVestingTentativeTractMapwhichmergestheProject’s twolots intoonegroundlot. Thisrequirement isbeingcodified inanewproposedProjectDesignFeature,PDF‐LandUse‐1,asfollows:

PDF‐LandUse‐1: Prior to the issuance of a building permit for above grade construction for theProject,theApplicantshalleither(1)recordacovenanttotietheProjectSite’stwolots;or (2)recordaphaseofanapproved tractmap for theProjectwhichmerges theSite’stwolotsintoonemastergroundlot.

Underthefirstoption,oncetheProjectSite’stwolotsaretied,theLosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety will treat the two lots as one lot for purposes of calculating the Project’s Floor Area Ratio andresidentialunitdensity.TheCovenantandAgreementtoHoldPropertyasOneParcelprovidesthatthetwolotscannotbesoldseparately,andthecovenantwillrunwiththelandandbebindingonfutureownersand



successors.Alternatively,underthesecondoption,thetwolotswillceasetoexist,andinsteadonenewlotwillbecreatedthatencompassestheentireProjectSite.Undereitherscenario,aConditionalUsePermitforFloorAreaandResidentialDensityAveragingwillnolongerberequired.ThefloorarearatioandresidentialdensityaveragingcalculationreflectedintheEIRremainscorrect.

6. NOISE

CommentsregardingnoisewerereceivedforthefirsttimeafterthepublicationoftheFinalEIRandduringthepublichearingprocess. Uponevaluationof these comments, it hasbeendetermined that theEIRhasproperly analyzed noise for the Project, and that the Draft EIR uses the required methodology for suchanalysis.

As a response to these comments, theCorrections andAdditionsbelow include a new constructionnoiseanalysis for an added sensitive receptor (the Le BonHotel), provide a distance correction for a potentialfuturerelatedproject(BLVD6200,southofHollywoodBoulevard)withadiscussionofthepotentialnoiseimpacts at that location, a revision of the Mitigation Measure that requires noise barriers to reduceconstruction noise, and the provision of additional input data that was used in calculating the Project’svibrationimpactonthePalladiumandtrafficnoiseanalysis.

Comments Regarding the Le Bon Hotel and Required Mitigation

Comments receivedduring thepublichearingprocessexpressedconcern that theLeBonHotel locatedat1610 Argyle Avenue was not identified in the EIR as a sensitive receptor. According to its website, theHollywoodLeBonHotelopened forbusiness inNovember2013,after theNOPfor theProjectwas issuedandafterthetimethatanalysisofconstructionnoisewasundertaken.Priortoitsrenovationintoahotel,theproperty was an office building, which is not a noise‐sensitive use under CEQA. Pursuant to CEQA, theexistingbaselineforEIRsistypicallybasedonexistingusesatthetimeanNOPisissued.

As the LeBonHotel is nowoccupied, an analysis of the potential constructionnoise levels to the LeBonHotelhasbeenperformedandincorporatedintotheCorrectionsandAdditionssectionofErrata1. TheLeBon Hotel is located approximately 200 feet from the Project Site. The analysis concludes that theconstructionnoise levelscouldreach75dBA,whichwouldexceedthesignificancethresholdof68dBAatnearby monitored noise location R4. To address the potentially significant impact the mitigation noisemeasure,MM‐NOISE‐1,whichrequiresconstructionnoisebarriersatspecifiedlocationsaroundtheedgeoftheProjectSite,hasbeenmodifiedtorequireconstructionofan8dBa,16footheightnoisebarrierbetweentheProjectandtheLeBonHotel.ThismodificationwillaccountfortheimpactsattheLeBonHotelresultinginlessthansignificantimpactsatthatlocation.

Comment Regarding Related Project 9: BLVD 6200, south of Hollywood Boulevard.

RelatedProject9,BLVD6200,waspreviouslyreportedintheDraftEIRExistingConditionsSectionasbeinglocatedapproximately250feetfromtheProjectSite.Thatdistancehasbeenmeasuredagaininresponsetothecommentandhasbeenrevisedto200feetasamoreaccuratedescriptionofitsdistance.ThisproposedresidentialprojectisnotyetunderconstructionandmaynotbeoccupiedduringProjectconstruction.



However, as discussed further in the Corrections and Additions, this potential future Project is locatedadjacent to theLeBonHotel, forwhichsubsequentanalysishasbeenperformed. Thatanalysisconcludesthattheconstructionnoiselevelscouldreach75dBA,whichwouldexceedthesignificancethresholdof68dBA at location R4; and therefore mitigation noise measure, MM‐NOISE‐1, has beenmodified to requireconstruction of an 8 dBA, 16 foot height noise barrier. As the BLVD 6200 project is also located atapproximately200feetaway,andatthesamereceptorlocation,theanalysisandmitigationfortheLeBonHotel would apply to andmitigate the potential impacts for the BLVD 6200 project aswell, to less thansignificantlevels.

Added Input Data Regarding the input Parameters for the Analyses of Vibration and

Roadway Noise

Footnote24ofSection4.I,NoiseoftheDraftEIR,providesinformationregardingthecalculationofvibrationimpacts at the Palladium building. That footnote has been amended to provide additional informationregarding the calculation. Also, Draft EIR Noise Appendix H‐1.3 has been replaced, with correctedinformation.NoiseAppendixH‐1.5hasbeensupplementedwithadditionalinformationregardingroadwayinformation(numberof lanes, lanewidth,parkinglanewidthandsidewalkwidthaswellascruisespeed).TheinformationisprovidedintheErrataAppendicesC‐2andC‐3,below.

7. TRAFFIC

SpecificcommentsregardingtrafficwerereceivedforthefirsttimeafterthepublicationoftheFinalEIRandduringthepublichearingprocess. Oneof thecommentspertainstoapprovalofMobilityPlan2035. Thiscomment is addressed below. Based on this comment and the further analyses discussed below, nosignificant impactsbeyondthoseidentifiedintheDraftEIRwouldoccur,andsignificant impactswouldbereducedwitheliminationoftheresidential/hotelOption2.

Approval of Mobility Plan 2035

SubsequenttopublicationoftheFinalEIRinMarch2015,theCityofLosAngelesadopteditsnewMobilityPlan2035,AnElementoftheGeneralPlan(LosAngelesDepartmentofPlanning,approvedAugust2015).Thestreetdescriptionsthatwerepreviouslyprovidedonpages4.L‐2through4.L‐6oftheDraftEIRmentionedboththethen‐currentdesignationforeachstreetaswellasthedesignationasproposedintheDraftMobilityPlan2035asitexistedatthattime.NowthatthePlanhasbeencompleted,thefinalroaddesignations,pertheadoptedMobilityElement2035,havebeenclarifiedintheCorrectionsandAdditionsbelow.ThesefinaldesignationsdonotchangeanyoftheanalysesorconclusionsoftheEIR’sTransportationAnalysisReport.

Elimination of Project Option 2 – Reduced Traffic Impacts

As described above, the Project Applicant has decided to no longer pursue development Option 2, aresidentialwithhotel (andground level retail)project, andwillbeproceedingsolelywith theresidential‐onlyProjectOption1. ThetrafficimpactsofOption2weregreaterthanthoseofOption1,theresidential‐onlyProject.Priortomitigation,Option2hadsignificantimpactsatthreemoreintersectionsthanOption1under existing and/or future baseline conditions;with elimination ofOption 2, therewould no longer besignificantimpactsattheseintersections.TheseincludeIntersection#2,CahuengaBoulevardandFranklinAvenue,Intersection#12,VineStreetandSantaMonicaBoulevardandIntersection#23,GowerStreetand



Franklin Avenue. Further, Option 2 also had a significant impact on the residential street segment of ElCentroAvenuebetweenLelandWayandDeLongpreAvenueunderexistingbaselineconditions;therewerenosignificantimpactstoresidentialstreetsegmentsunderOption1.WiththeeliminationofOption2,thesesignificantimpactswouldnolongeroccurwithdevelopmentoftheproposedProject.

PursuanttoCEQAguidelines,theTrafficStudyandEIRanalysisconsideredfeasiblemitigationmeasurestoreduce the potential impacts associated with the three intersections and one residential street segmentidentified for the additional Option 2 impacts. Mitigation Measure MM‐TRAF‐7 required the Project toprovideimprovementsand/orfair‐sharephysicalimprovementsatthetwointersectionsforwhichfeasiblemitigation were identified: Intersection #2, Cahuenga Boulevard and Franklin Avenue and #23, GowerStreet and Franklin Avenue. As the impacts at these intersections are no longer significant, MitigationMeasureMM‐TRAF‐7 isno longerrequiredandhasbeendeleted fromtheProject’sMitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram.

TheEIRanalysisalsoincludedmitigationmeasureMM‐TRAF‐10toreducethepotentiallysignificantstreetsegment impact fromOption2. Thismitigationmeasurehas alsobeendeleted from theanalysis and theMitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram.

Comments Submitted Subsequent to the Final EIR

Fehr&Peers has reviewed all of the comments concerning traffic thatwere received after release of theFinalEIRandduring thepublichearingprocess. BasedonFehr&Peers’ analysis, noneof the commentsidentify inconsistencies between the EIR analysis and CEQA, Caltrans or City Guidelines or change theconclusionsoftheEIR.

The traffic impact analysis in theDraftEIRwas very conservative and likelyoverestimatedProject trafficimpacts.Thetrafficanalysisincludedthefollowingconservativemeasures:

Included traffic generated by 62 related development projects, even though some of theseprojects may not be approved or constructed, andmany have remained on the City’s relatedprojects list for years without progress toward construction. Furthermore, the City’s relatedprojects list does not always include adjustments to remove traffic generated by existing landusesontherelatedprojectsitethatwouldberemovedbytherelatedproject. Alsotherelatedprojects trip generation was added in addition to the 1 percent per year background trafficgrowthappliedtotheProjectinthecumulativeimpactsanalysis.

EventhoughtherelatedprojectslistcouldbelimitedtoprojectsonfilewiththeCityatthetimeof the Project’s NOP, the Transportation Analysis Report and EIR also analyzed additionalprojectsfiledbetweentheNOPandpublicationoftheDraftEIR.

Added even further cumulative growth by conducting an alternative analysis increasing thebackground volume/capacity (V/C) ratios at every study intersection by 0.100, which is theamountthatraisestheoperatinglevelofmostcongestedintersectionsbyoneclass(e.g.LOSCtoLOSD). This reflects amore congested condition and requires a smaller increment of Projecttripstocauseasignificantimpact.



Adjustedthecapacityvaluesatstudyintersectionsthatoperateunderoversaturatedcongestedconditionstoensurethatthesuppressedtrafficvolumesdonotresultinanincorrectcalculationoflevelofservice.

Didnottakecredit inthemitigationanalysisforimplementationoftheProject’stransportationdemand management (TDM) program, even though it is a required mitigation measure(previouslyMM‐TRAF‐9intheDraftEIRandnowdesignatedasMM‐TRAF‐8).

Did not take credit in the mitigation analysis for the implementation for the traffic signalcontroller upgrades required by LADOT and included in the Project’s mitigation program(previouslyMM‐TRAF‐8intheDraftEIRandnowdesignatedasMM‐TRAF‐7).

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCHNo.2013081022 D‐1

D. CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS

1. GENERAL/GLOBAL CORRECTION TO THE EIR REGARDING THE HOTEL OPTION

AsdescribedintheProjectRefinementsabove,theinitialProjectDescriptionincludedtwoProjectOptions–Option1,Residential,with731residentialunitsandOption2,Residential/Hotel,with598residentialunitsanda250roomhotelwithrelatedhotelfacilitiesandgroundlevelretail. GivenrecentrequestsforclarityandcertaintyabouttheProject’suses,andthedevelopmentandproposalofmanyotherhotelsinHollywood,theProjectApplicanthasdecidedtoproceedwiththeresidential‐only,Option1thatwasanalyzedintheDraftandFinalEIR,andwillnotpursueahotelcomponent.

For this reason,all references toOption2,Residential/Hotel, areno longerapplicable to theProject. Theanalyses in theEIRmaybeconsidered for informationand impactsofanalternative typeofdevelopmentthathadbeenconsideredfortheProjectSite.

SpecificcorrectionsandadditionsregardingOption2havebeenaddedtothefollowingDraftEIRsectionsforconsistency with conclusions in entitlement documents going forward: Section 4.L, Transportation andCirculation;Section6.A,SignificantUnavoidableImpacts;andSection6.B,ReasonsWhytheProjectisBeingProposed,NotwithstandingSignificantUnavoidableImpacts.

2. GLOBAL REVISIONS REGARDING ENTITLEMENT REQUESTS AND PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES

ConsistentwiththeProjectRefinementsandcommentsdiscussedintheAdditionalEIRInformationSection,both discussed above, the Project is proposingminormodifications to the Project entitlements, proposedzoningconditions,andhistoricProjectDesignFeatures,asshownbelow.Theseminormodificationsapplytoall of the locations in the EIR where Project entitlements, zoning conditions and historic Project DesignFeaturesarediscussed.

Revisions to the List of Necessary Approvals

The second, third, fourth and fifth bullets in the list of necessary approvals, first listed on Pages 2‐23

and 4.H‐21 of the Draft EIR, and previously amended on Page 2‐29 of the Final EIR have been proposed

to read as follows:

Zone Change and Height District Change to designate the entire site [Q]C4‐2D‐SN, removing therestrictions on residential uses on the SelmaAvenueArea, updating references to the CommunityRedevelopment Agency on the Sunset Boulevard Area, potentially including options for rooftopdining,andrevisingupdatingtheProject’sQConditionsandDLimitations, includingbyaddingaQcondition to require the Applicant to nominate the Palladium as a Historic‐CulturalMonument inaccordancewiththeCity’sCulturalHeritageOrdinanceinconnectionwithpriortotheissuanceofabuildingpermitfortheProject;

ConditionalUsePermittoallowthesaleofafulllineofalcoholicbeveragesforon‐siteconsumptionattheProject’sproposedrestaurant/diningandhoteluses,includingin‐roomhotelmini‐bars,hotel

D. Corrections and Additions November 2015


restaurant/bar,andhotelmeetingrooms,aswellasattheProject’sresidentialand/orhotelindoorand rooftop lounges (recognizing that the existing Hollywood Palladium already has a deemed‐approved Conditional Use Permit for alcohol), and for off‐site consumption within the Project’sgroundfloorretailatapotentialgourmetfoodorboutiquewinestore;

ConditionalUsePermittoallowahotelintheC4Zonewithin500feetofanRzone;

ConditionalUsePermittoallowFloorAreaAveragingandResidentialDensityTransferbetweentheProjectSite’stwoparcels;

Revisions to the Project’s Q Conditions and D Limitation


In the event that a project adjacent to the Hollywood Palladium theatre building located at6201SunsetBoulevardisapprovedatadensityof6.0:1FAR,andprovidedthatalladministrativeandlegal appeals and challenges have been resolved permitting a projectwith a density of 6.0:1 FAR,then prior to issuance of building permits for such project, the applicant shall nominate theHollywoodPalladiumtheatrebuildingasaHistoric‐CulturalMonument inaccordancewith theLosAngeles Cultural Heritage Ordinance, Municipal Code Sections. 22.171 et seq. In the event theapplicant does not nominate the Hollywood Palladium theatre building as a Historic‐CulturalMonument, theapplicantwillnotopposeanyotherentitynominatingthebuildingasanHistoricalCulturalMonument.The applicant recognizes that Sec. 511of theHollywoodRedevelopmentPlanstates that “[t]he [Community Redevelopment] Agency shall deny requests for housing incentiveunits, development in the Regional Center Commercial designation above an F.A.R. of 4.5:1 andvariationsforsitesonwhichastructuredeterminedbytheAgencytobesignificantwasdemolishedafter the adoption of this Plan or is proposed to be demolished; however, under exceptionalcircumstanceswhereasignificantstructurehasbeensubstantiallydamagedandmustbedemolishedduetocircumstancesbeyondthecontrolof theowner, theAgencymaygrantrequests forhousingincentiveunits,developmentwithintheRegionalCenterCommercialdesignationaboveanF.A.R.of4.5:1andvariations.”TheapplicantagreesthatalldevelopmentdensityfromthePalladiumbuildingsitewillbeusedforaprojectdevelopedonadjacentproperty,andshallnotbeusedtoredevelopthePalladiumbuildingsite,whichdevelopment rights shallonlybe for repairor reconstructionof thePalladium building in the event of damage or loss, unless it is determined thatrestoration/reconstructionofthebuildingisimpractical.


PriortotheDepartmentofCityPlanning’ssign‐offonbuildingpermitsforaprojectwitha6.0:1FARdirectlyadjacenttothePalladium,theDepartmentofCityPlanning’sPlanning, inconsultationwithitsOfficeofHistoricResources,shallconfirmthattheproject’sbuildingplanssubstantiallyconformtotheconceptualplanspresentedanddescribedintheEnvironmentalImpactReportandapprovedbytheCityofLosAngeles.

ModifiedDLimitation:

A project on this sitemay be developed at a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of between 4.5:1 and not toexceed6.0:1providedthat:

November 2015 D. Corrections and Additions


a. The Department of City Planning or other as the successor to the to the CommunityRedevelopmentAgencyfindsthattheprojectconformstotheHollywoodRedevelopmentPlanandHollywoodCommunityPlan;and

a. The Community Redevelopment Agency, any successor to the CommunityRedevelopmentAgency, or theDepartmentofCityPlanningofLosAngelespursuant tothe transferbyordinanceof redevelopment landuseplansand functions to theCityofLos Angeles (C.F. No. 12‐0014‐S4), finds that the project conforms to the HollywoodRedevelopmentPlanwithfindingsasrequiredbySec.506.2.3oftheRedevelopmentPlanandapprovesanOwnerParticipationAgreement;and

b. Theprojectproject’shistoricanalysisisapprovedbytheOfficeofHistoricResources,andthe project is approved by City Planning Commission, or the City Council on appeal,pursuanttotheproceduressetforthinLAMC12.32D.

Revisions to the Project’s Historic Project Design Features

Volume 5, Final EIR, Pages 2‐14 to 2‐16. Revise the second, fourth and sixth paragraphs of PDF‐HIST‐1,

as follows:

Second Paragraph

A. Timing. A draft Palladium Preservation and Enhancement Plan proposed by theApplicantshallbesubmittedtoHollywoodHeritageandOHRno later than30calendardayspriortoanydesignreviewrequiredfromsameandpriortotheissuanceofbuildingpermits for the Project, and a which will include identification of character‐definingfeatures and the significance of such features. A final Plan shall be approved by OHRprior to issuance of final certificates of occupancy for the Project. At the Applicant’soption, earlier review by OHRmay be requested such as during schematic design anddesigndevelopment.AnHistoricStructureReportshallalsobepreparedinconjunctionwiththefinalPreservationandEnhancementPlan.

Fourth Paragraph

– ImprovethePalladium’sexistingback‐stagespace,back‐of‐houseservice,andloadingoperations,whichdonotmeetcurrentperformanceandproductionneeds‐replacethe 2008 addition on the northern side of the Palladium, and potentially thepreviouslyaltered,originalextensioninthesamelocation,withsubterraneanand/oroverhead bridge connections to the new building on the north side. Additionally,relocate the existing outdoor truck loading area to a subterranean level withsubterranean access from Argyle and Selma Avenues. These enhancements wouldprovide additional staging areas for the Palladium’s operations within the newbuilding; improve loading operations; eliminate any potential pedestrian‐vehicularconflictsonElCentroAvenue;andprovidesubstantiallymoreopenspaceontherearsideofthePalladiumforwalkingandgathering;



Sixth Paragraph

– Prepare a design program for the Palladium’s existing southern storefront spaces.The nonstructural storefront partitions on the southern façade of the PalladiumbuildingwerealteredpriortothePalladium’s2008rehabilitationproject,andwerenotuniformorcharacter‐defining.The2008rehabilitation fundedbyCRAremovednon‐character‐defining features, reconstructed missing original features, and builtnew features such as storefronts that are compatible with the historic building.Similartotheintentandimplementationofthe2008rehabilitation,adesignprogramforthesestorefrontswouldwillincludeauniformsetofcomponentsthatprovidefora coherent design among the different storefront bays while allowing for layoutoptions that meet the needs of tenants, for instance allowing alterations of thelocationsandnumbersofdoors,windows,andmullions;

Volume 5, Final EIR, Page 2‐‐17. Revise PDF‐HIST‐2, as follows:

PDF‐HIST‐2:Historic InterpretiveExhibit.AnHistoric InterpretiveExhibit shallbe incorporatedinto the Project at key locations to increase general public and patron awareness andappreciationofthehistoryandsignificanceofHollywoodandtheHollywoodPalladium.Theexhibitshallprovideinformativevisualdisplaysand/ormediathatmayaddresssuchtopicsas:thebuilding’sarchitecturalstyleandarchitect;identificationofotherhistoricalbuildingsintheProjectvicinityandtheirrelationshiptothePalladium;useoftheProjectSiteprior to constructionof thePalladiumand thehistoricHollywoodcontext; and thelayersofhistoryatthesite:agriculture,motionpictureindustry,musicalrecording, liveentertainment, radio, and television. The display shall be designed and implementedpursuanttoinputfromHollywoodstakeholders.TheHistoricInterpretiveExhibitmaybelocated within the Palladium building itself, or as an outdoor interpretive programreviewed and approved by the Office of Historic Resources. The Historic InterpretiveExhibitwillnotbehousedinseparatenewconstructionappendedtotheexteriorofthePalladiumbuilding.

3. INDIVIDUAL REVISIONS TO THE EIR

InresponsetotheProjectRefinementsdiscussedabove,andtocommentsmadeafterpublicationoftheFinalEIR,thefollowingadditionalcorrectionsandadditionstotheEIRhavebeenmadeandareprovidedbelowwithdeletionsshowninstrikethroughandadditionsshowinunderline.

Executive Summary

1. Volume 1, Table ES‐1, Mitigation Measures column for C.1, Archaeological and Paleontological

Resource, Page ES‐15. Revise mitigation measure MM‐ARCH‐1 as follows:

MM‐ARCH‐1:TheApplicantshallretainaqualifiedarchaeologicalmonitorwhomeetstheSecretaryof the Interior’sProfessionalQualificationsStandards foranarchaeologistwhoshallbepresent during construction excavations such as grading, trenching, grubbing, or anyother construction excavation activity associated with the Project. The frequency ofmonitoring shall be determined by the archaeological monitor based on the rate of



excavation and grading activities, proximity to known archaeological resources, thematerials being excavated (native versus fill soils), and the depth of excavation, and iffound, the abundance and type of archaeological resources encountered. Prior to theonsetofconstructionactivitiesanArchaeologicalResourceMitigationPlan(ARMP)shallbeprepared.TheARMPshallincludeprotocolsforimplementationoftheArchaeologicalMitigationMeasures;andshallalsorequireimplementationofapre‐constructiontestingprogramwithasamplingofsoiltestingatrepresentativetesttrenches.

2. Volume 1, Table ES‐1, PDF Column for E. Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Page ES‐24. Revise PDF‐GHG‐

1 as follows:


3. Volume 1, Table ES‐1, second table row for Land Use Planning on page ES‐33 is revised to add the

new Land Use Project Design Feature as follows:

PDF‐LandUse‐1: Prior to the issuance of a building permit for above grade construction for theProject,theApplicantshalleither(1)recordacovenanttotietheProjectSite’stwolots;or (2)recordaphaseofanapproved tractmap for theProjectwhichmerges theSite’stwolotsintoonemastergroundlot.

4. Volume 1, Table ES‐1, Mitigation Measures column for I.1,Noise, Page ES‐35. Revise mitigation

measure MM‐NOISE‐1 as follows:

MM‐NOISE‐1:Temporaryconstructionnoisebarriersshallbeimplementedasfollows:

TheProjectshallensuretheprovisionofa5dBAnoisebarrierbetweentheProjectconstruction and the existing residential development on the northwest corner ofSelma Avenue and Argyle Avenue (existing buildings between the residentialdevelopmentandtheProjectatthetimeofconstructionmaycontributetothesound



attenuation).;andan8dBA,16foothighnoisebarrierbetweentheProjectandtheLeBonHotel(allowingforagatethatmaybeopenedfromtimetotimeforSiteentry).

IfthefollowingrelatedprojectsadjacenttotheProjectSite(i.e.atColumbiaSquare,theSelmaandVineproject,theBLVD6200projectsouthofHollywoodBoulevard,or6250 Sunset project) are occupied by new residents at the time of Projectconstruction, then temporary noise barriers shall be provided between the Projectconstruction and those occupied units. Based on the exceedance of the thresholdsnoted in the above analysis (given the distance from the Project Site and existingsoundlevelsattherespectivelocations),thebarriersshallprovideasoundreductionof5dBAbetweentheProjectSiteandthe6250Sunsetproject,andapproximately10dBAbetweentheProjectandtheremainingfutureprojects.

5. Volume 1, Table ES‐1, Impact Statements TRAF‐2 and TRAF‐4, Pages ES‐51 to ES‐54. Revise the

Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the two Impact Statements as follows:

Environmental Impacts Project Design Features (PDF‐) Mitigation Measures (MM‐) Level of Significance

ImpactStatementTRAF‐2:Whenmeasuredagainstexisting2013baselineconditions,priortomitigationProjecttrafficwouldexceedthesignificancethresholdsatthreeintersections(allintheP.M.peakhour)underOption1,Residential.UnderOption2,Residential/HoteltheProjecttrafficwouldexceedthesignificancethresholdatfivelocations(threeintheP.M.peakhour,oneintheA.M.peakhourandoneduringbothpeakhours.)Whenmeasuredagainstfuture2018baselineconditions,priortomitigationProjecttrafficwouldexceedthesignificancethresholdsatthreeintersections(oneintheP.M.peakhourandtwoinbothpeakhours)underOption1,Residential.UnderOption2,Residential/HoteltheProjecttrafficwouldexceedthesignificancethresholdatsevenlocations(fourintheP.M.peakhour,andthreeduringbothpeakhours.)WhilenotrequiredbyCEQAorLADOT,thetrafficstudyalsoconservativelyconsiderspotentialfuturenewprojectsinthestudyareawhichareunknownatthistime.Toaccountforgrowthintrafficfrompotentialfuturenewprojectsthatcouldbeproposedwithinthestudyarea,thetrafficanalysisalsoappliedanadditional0.100incrementtoV/C

NotApplicable

MitigationMeasureTRAF‐7:TheProjectshallimplementthefollowingphysicalroadwayimprovementsthatcanbeprovidedwithinexistingroadwaywidthswithoutrequiringremovalofparkingspaces: Intersection2,CahuengaBoulevard

&FranklinAvenue.Modifythesignalequipmentandoperationtoallowasouthboundprotectedleft‐turnmovementwithawestboundright‐turnoverlap.ThisimprovementwillrequirethesouthboundU‐turnsattheintersectiontoberestricted.

Intersection23,GowerStreet&FranklinAvenue.CoordinatewiththeColumbiaSquareprojectandLADOTtoarrangeforapotentialfairsharecontributiontowardstheimplementationofanimprovementproposedbytheColumbiaSquareprojectthatwouldupgradethetrafficsignalequipmenttoallowfornorthboundright‐turnoverlap.

MitigationMeasureTRAF‐87:TheProjectshallupgradetrafficsignalcontrollersfromaType170toaType2070atthefollowingsevenintersectionswithintheProjectstudyarea: YuccaStreetandWilcoxAvenue.

SelmaAvenueandWilcoxAvenue

DeLongpreAvenueandWilcox

Significantandunavoidabletrafficimpactswouldoccurasfollows:UnderExistingConditionsOption1 10. VineStreet

&SunsetBoulevard

28. GowerStreet&SunsetBoulevard

30. GowerStreet&SantaMonicaBoulevard

Option2 10. VineStreet

&SunsetBoulevard

12. VineStreet&SantaMonicaBoulevard



UnderFuture2018



ratiosunderfuturebaselineconditionstoeverystudyintersection.ThisconservativelyresultedinsignificantimpactsatanadditionalthreeintersectionsunderbothOption1andOption2.

Avenue

ColeAvenueandFountainAvenue

CahuengaAvenueandFountainAvenue

ElCentroAvenueandFountainAvenue

FountainAvenueandGowerStreet

MitigationMeasureTRAF‐98:TheProjectshallimplementatraveldemandmanagement(TDM)program,consistentwiththerecommendationsofLADOT.Theexactmeasurestobeimplementedwillbedeterminedwhentheplanisprepared,priortoissuanceofafinalcertificateofoccupancyfortheProject.TheTDMprogramshallensureappropriateimplementationoftheProject’ssidewalks/plazas,streettrees/landscaping,streetandpedestrianamenities,lightingandbicycleprovisionstoencouragealternativemodesoftransportation.Itshallalsoincludeotherfeaturesasappropriate,suchas,forexample,unbundledparking,(i.e.separatingthecostofpurchasingorrentingparkingspacesfromthecostofpurchasingorrentingadwellingunit);rideshareprograms,(whichcouldincludetheprovisionofanon‐sitetransitandrideshareinformationcenterthatprovidesassistancetohelppeopleformcarpoolsoraccesstransitalternatives,and/orpriorityparkingforcarpools;and/oratransitpassdiscountprogram(thattypicallyincludesnegotiatingwithtransitserviceproviderstopurchasetransitpassesinbulkatadiscountedratewithresaletointerestedresidentsoremployeesatdiscountedprices),identificationofanon‐siteTDMcoordinator,makinginformationavailabletoresidentsandemployeesregardingalternativetransportationoptions,monitoringandsurveyingrequirements,aguaranteedridehomeprogram,participationintheLADOTMobilityHubsprogram(whichcouldincludesecurebikeparking,bike‐sharekiosks,car‐shareparkingspacesandservices,and/orelectricscooter‐share),contributingaone‐timefixed‐feeof$100,000tobedepositedintotheCity’sBicycleTrustfundtoimplementbicycleimprovementswithintheareaofthe

BuildoutConditionsOption1 26. Gower

Street&HollywoodBoulevard



Option2 10. VineStreet

&SunsetBoulevard

12.VineStreet&SantaMonicaBoulevard

26. GowerStreet&HollywoodBoulevard



AdditionalIntersectionswithSignificantImpactsafterAddedGrowth(Options1and2UnderFutureConditions) 9. VineStreet

&SelmaAvenue

15. ArgyleAvenue&SelmaAvenue

29. GowerStreet&FountainAvenue



Project,and/orparticipationintheHollywoodTransportationManagementOrganization(TMO)tobecreatedbyothermajoremployersinHollywoodwithinthenextfewyears.TheProjectisalsoprovidingamplebicycleparkingandon‐sitebicyclerepairfacilitiesincompliancewithLosAngelesCityMunicipalCoderequirements.

ImpactStatementTRAF‐4:Whenmeasuredagainsttheexisting2013baseline,impactstoneighborhoodstreetsegmentsunderOption1,Residential,wouldbelessthansignificant.UnderOption2,Residential/Hotel,theProjecttripswouldexceedthesignificancethresholdatoneneighborhoodsegment:ElCentroAvenuebetweenLelandWayandDeLongpreAvenue.Whenmeasuredagainstthefuture2018baseline,theProjecttripswouldnotexceedthesignificancethresholdsatanylocationunderOption1orOption2.

NotApplicable

Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired.MitigationMeasureTRAF‐10:TheProjectshallfundandcoordinateimplementationofaTrafficCalmingPlantoreduceProjectimpactsonElCentroAvenuebetweenSantaMonicaBoulevardandSunsetAvenue.ThePlanshallbeapprovedbyLADOTandincludecommunityconsultationcoordinatedthroughtheCouncilOfficeonthefinalselectionofcalmingmeasuresincluded.Itshallincludesuchphysicalmeasuresaschangesinstreetalignment,installationofbarriers,speedhumps,speedtables,raisedcrosswalks,chicanes,andchokers,and/oroperationalmeasuressuchasturnrestrictions,speedlimits,andinstallationofstopsigns.

LessthanSignificantSignificantandunavoidableunderexistingconditionsatoneneighborhoodstreetsegment.Lessthansignificantunderthe2018futurebaseline.

Section 4.B Air Quality

1. Volume 1, Section 4.B Air Quality, 3.c(1) Land Use Characteristics, Page 4.B‐35. Add reference to

added EIR information at the end of the fourth paragraph in the section as follows:

For reference purposes, selected pages from the CAPCOA guidance related to the discussion of VMT,including pages that discuss the land use transportation measures that would reduce Project VMT, areprovidedinAppendixB‐1oftheEIRErrata.ThefullCAPCOAguidancedocumentisavailablefordownloadonthe internetat the followingaddress: http://www.capcoa.org/wp‐content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA‐Quantification‐Report‐9‐14‐Final.pdf

2. Volume 1, Section 4.B Air Quality, 3.c(2) Project Design Features, Page 4.B‐38. Revise PDF‐GHG‐1 as

follows:

PDF‐GHG‐1: Construction Measures: The Project shall utilize off‐road diesel‐poweredconstructionequipment thatmeetor exceed theCARBandUSEPATier3Tier4off‐roademissionsstandards for thoseequipment ratedat50hporgreaterduring thegrading,concretepouringandbuildingconstructionphasesofProjectconstruction.Polepower(electricitydeliveredfromtheutilitygrid)shallbetheprimarysourceofpowerforusewithon‐siteelectrictools,equipment,lighting,etc.,exceptwhere/wheninfeasibleduetositeconstraints;dieselgenerators,ifneeded,shallberatedbetween75 horsepower (hp) and 750 hp andmeet or exceed applicable Tier 4 standards.Total diesel generator usage during construction shall not exceed 312,000



horsepower‐hours.Cranesandconcretepumpsshallbeelectrifiedwithpolepower.TheProjectshallutilizeon‐roadhaultrucksthatmeetorexceedthemodelyear2010emission standards. These requirements shall be included in applicable biddocumentsandsuccessfulcontractor(s)mustdemonstratetheabilitytosupplysuchequipment. A copy of each unit’s certified tier specification or model yearspecificationandCARBorSCAQMDoperatingpermit(ifapplicable)shallbeavailableuponrequestatthetimeofmobilizationofeachapplicableunitofequipment.

3. Volume 1, Section 4.B.3.d(1)(b) Air Quality analysis of localized construction impacts, Page 4.B‐43.

Insert after the first paragraph, information regarding subsequent dispersion modeling, as follows:

(iii) Subsequent Dispersion Modeling

In order to address public comments subsequent to the publication of the Final EIR a supplementalassessmentoflocalizedconstructionimpactshasbeenperformed.ThesupplementalstudywasbasedonanLSTanalysisusingtheAERMODdispersionmodelprimarilyevaluatingthepotential localizedconstructionimpactsonthe1.87acresareaor theProjectSite,exclusiveof thearea inwhichthePalladiumbuilding islocated(constructionemissionsassociatedwithrenovationsrelatedtotheexistingPalladiumwerelocatedatthePalladiumbuilding).Theselectionofthesmallerlotareawaschosentofocustheanalysisonthenewdevelopment proposed for the parking lots adjacent to the Palladium building. The analysis takes intoaccount and addresses impacts at the nearest sensitive receptorswhether existing or identified as futuredevelopment.ThefullanalysisisprovidedinaTechnicalMemorandumincludedinAppendixB‐3oftheEIRErrata 1. The Technical Memorandum discusses the methodology used, the significance thresholds, theassumptions,calculations,andconclusions,withattachedworksheets.

Theresultsof theanalysis indicate that forNO2andCO, localizedconstructionemissions fromtheProjectwouldnotcauseanexceedanceoftheNAAQSorCAAQSatexistingorfuturesensitivereceptors.LocalizedconstructionemissionsfromtheProjectwouldresultinamaximumincrementalincreaseofapproximately1.3µg/m3 forPM10andapproximately0.7µg/m3 forPM2.5,atsensitivereceptors,whichwouldnotexceedthesignificancethresholdof10.4µg/m3.Asaresult,thelocalizedconstructionimpactswouldbelessthansignificant,forthisanalysisaswellasthepreviouslypreparedanalysis.

4. Volume 1, Section 4.B.3.d(2)(b) Air Quality analysis of localized operations impacts, Page 4.B‐43.

Insert at the bottom of the page, information regarding subsequent dispersion modeling, as follows:

(iii) Subsequent Dispersion Modeling

InordertoaddresspubliccommentssubsequenttopublicationoftheFinalEIR,asupplementalassessmentoflocalizedoperationsimpactshasbeenperformed.ThesupplementalstudywasbasedonanLSTanalysisusing theAERMODdispersionmodelprimarily evaluating thepotential localizedoperations impacts fromthe 1.87 acres area of the Project Site, exclusive of the area in which the Palladium building is located(operationalemissionsassociatedwiththeproposedretailuseswerelocatedatthesouthwestandsoutheastcornersofthePalladiumbuilding).TheselectionofthesmallerlotareawaschosentofocustheanalysisonthenewdevelopmentproposedfortheparkinglotsadjacenttothePalladiumbuilding. Theanalysistakesinto account and addresses impacts at the nearest sensitive receptors whether existing or identified asfuturedevelopment.ThefullanalysisisprovidedinaTechnicalMemorandumincludedinAppendixB‐3of



theEIRErrata1.TheTechnicalMemorandumdiscussesthemethodologyused,thesignificancethresholds,theassumptions,calculations,andconclusions,withattachedworksheets.

TheresultsoftheanalysisindicatethatlocalizedNO2andCOemissions(includingfromthevehiclesenteringand exiting the proposed parking structure)would not cause and exceedance of theNAAQS or CAAQS atexistingorfuturesensitivereceptors.EmissionsofPM10andPM2.5wouldresultinamaximumincrementalincreaseof2.18µg/m3atsensitivereceptors,whichwouldnotexceedtheoperationalsignificancethresholdof2.5µg/m3.Asaresult,thelocalizedoperationalimpactswouldbelessthansignificant.

54. Volume 1, Section 4.B.3.d(3)(a) Health Risk Assessment on Pages 4.B‐49 to 4.B‐50. Insert at the

end of the continuing paragraph at the top of the page, the following subsequent analysis based on

March 2015 OEHHA Guidelines, as follows:

Analysis per March 2015 OEHHA Guidelines.

ThepreviousparagraphpresentsaqualitativeanalysisoftheTAChealthriskduetoconstructionactivities.The analysis in the Draft EIR was performed according to the applicable guidelines at the time it waspublished. In March 2015, as the Final EIR was being prepared for publication, OEHHA adopted newguidelineswhichupdated thepreviousguidance forpreparingHealthRiskAssessments (HRAs)under theState’s Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Program Risk Assessment program by incorporating advances in riskassessmentwith consideration of infants and childrenusingAge Sensitivity Factors (ASF). These changesalso take into account different breathing rates and time spent at home. On June 5, 2015, SCAQMDincorporatedtheupdatedOEHHAguidelinesintoitsapplicablerulesthatapplytocertainstationarysourcesregulatedundertheHotSpotsprogram.1TheSCAQMDhasnotyetreleasedguidanceontheapplicabilityoftheupdatedOEHHAguidelinesforpreparingCEQAdocuments.

Nonetheless, even though SCAQMD has not recommended using the updated OEHHA guidelines forpreparingHRAsinCEQAdocuments,tobeconservative,ananalysiswasperformedusingtheseguidelines,whichisincludedasaTechnicalReportinAppendixB‐2ofErrata1.

The new analyses address both the construction impacts thatwere previously analyzed qualitatively andalsotheoperationsimpacts,previouslyquantifiedinaccordancewithOEHHAguidance.Thesupplementalanalyses consider infants and children, increased sensitivity for early‐in‐life exposure to carcinogens, andupdatedpollutantexposurefactors.

The Technical Appendices provides regulatory background information, methodology, assumptions,calculationsandconclusionsalongwithquantitativeworksheets.AsindicatedintheTechnicalAppendixB‐2theincrementalincreaseinhealthriskfromconstructionwouldbe6.5inonemillion,whichislessthanthesignificancethresholdof10inonemillionandthereforelessthansignificant.

As the 2015 OEHHA guidelines are more sensitive to the protection of the public safety than previousguidelines, more protective constructionmeasures have been incorporated into the Project’s PDF‐GHG‐1

1 South Coast Air Quality Management District. Minutes of the lune 5. 2015 Meeting, http://www.aqmd.gov/doc/default‐

source/Agendas/Governing‐Board/2015/2015‐Jul10‐001.pdf?sfvrsn=8,AccessedSeptember28,2015.



shownabove to incorporate theuseofCARB/USEPATier4 standards in lieuof theTier3 standards, andincreaseduseofelectricconstructionequipment. TheupdatedPDF‐GHG‐1measurewasincorporatedintotheconstructionhealthriskassessment.

6. Volume 1, Section 4.B.3.d(3)(b) Health Risk Assessment on Pages 4.B‐50 to 4.B‐52. Insert at the end

of the operations health risk assessment after Table 4.B‐12, the following subsequent analysis based

on March 2015 OEHHA Guidelines, as follows:

Analysis per March 2015 OEHHA Guidelines.

The Draft EIR determined that Project operations would result in an incremental cancer risk ofapproximately3.6inonemillion,whichislessthanthe10inonemillionsignificancethreshold.Theprimarycontributor to the risk was emissions from restaurant charbroiling. The operational HRA assesseduncontrolled TAC emissions from charbroiling. However, restaurant charbroiling would comply withSCAQMDRule1138 (ControlofEmissions fromRestaurantOperations),which requires the installationofemissions controls on charbroilers in use in theAir Basin. The cancer risk fromProject operationswithcharbroileremissionscontrolsinplacewouldbe0.7inonemillion.

WhentakingintoaccounttheagesensitivityandupdatedexposurefactorsunderthenewOEHHAguidanceforstationarysources,thecancerriskfromProjectoperationswithcharbroileremissionscontrolsinplacewouldbe2.0inonemillion,whichislessthanthe10inonemillionsignificancethreshold.Asaresult,healthriskimpactsfromProjectoperationwouldbelessthansignificantunderthenewOEHHAmethodologyforstationarysources.

Section 4.C.1 Archaeological and Paleontological Resources

1. Volume 1, Cultural Resource Mitigation Measures, Page 4.C.1‐15. Revise mitigation measure MM‐

ARCH‐1 as follows:

MM‐ARCH‐1: The Applicant shall retain a qualified archaeological monitor who meets theSecretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for anarchaeologist who shall be present during construction excavations such asgrading, trenching, grubbing, or any other construction excavation activityassociatedwiththeProject.Thefrequencyofmonitoringshallbedeterminedbythearchaeologicalmonitorbasedontherateofexcavationandgradingactivities,proximity to known archaeological resources, the materials being excavated(nativeversusfillsoils),andthedepthofexcavation,andiffound,theabundanceand type of archaeological resources encountered. Prior to the onset ofconstructionactivitiesanArchaeologicalResourceMitigationPlan(ARMP)shallbe prepared. The ARMP shall include protocols for implementation of theArchaeologicalMitigationMeasures;andshallalsorequire implementationofapre‐construction testing program with a sampling of soil testing atrepresentativetesttrenches.



Section 4.E Greenhouse Gas Emissions

1. Volume 1, Section 4.E.2.b.(2) regarding Regulatory Setting, bottom of Page 4.E‐16. Insert

information regarding Executive Order B‐30‐15, and Cap and Trade Program as follows:

(l) Executive Order B‐30‐15

OnApril29,2015,CaliforniaGovernorBrownissuedExecutiveOrderB‐30‐15.Therein,GovernorBrown:

Established a new interim statewide reduction target to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percentbelow1990levelsby2030.

Ordered all state agencies with jurisdiction over sources of GHG emissions to implementmeasurestoachievereductionsofGHGemissionstomeetthe2030and2050reductiontargets.

DirectedCARBtoupdatetheClimateChangeScopingPlantoexpressthe2030targetintermsofmillionmetrictonsofcarbondioxideequivalent.

CARB subsequently expressed its intention to initiate theClimateChange ScopingPlanupdateduring theSummerof2015,withadoptionscheduledfor2016.

(m) Cap and Trade Program

TheClimateChangeScopingPlanidentifiesacap‐and‐tradeprogramasoneofthestrategiesCaliforniawillemploy to reduceGHG emissions. CARBasserts that this programwill helpputCalifornia on thepath tomeetitsgoalofreducingGHGemissionsto1990levelsbytheyear2020,andultimatelyachievingan80%reductionfrom1990levelsby2050. Undercap‐and‐trade,anoveralllimitonGHGemissionsfromcappedsectorsisestablishedandfacilitiessubjecttothecapwillbeabletotradepermitstoemitGHGs.

CARBdesignedandadoptedaCaliforniaCap‐and‐TradeProgrampursuanttoitsauthorityunderAB32.Thedevelopment of this program included a multi‐year stakeholder process and consideration of potentialimpactsondisproportionately impactedcommunities. TheCap‐and‐TradeProgram2isdesignedtoreduceGHG emissions frommajor sources (deemed “covered entities”) by setting a firm cap on statewide GHGemissionsandemployingmarketmechanismstoachieveAB32’semission‐reductionmandateofreturningto1990levelsofemissionsby2020. Thestatewidecap forGHGemissionsfromthecappedsectors3(e.g.,electricitygeneration,petroleumrefining,andcementproduction)commencedin2013andwilldeclineovertime,achievingGHGemissionreductionsthroughouttheProgram’sduration.

UndertheCap‐and‐TradeProgram,CARBissuesallowancesequaltothetotalamountofallowableemissionsoveragivencomplianceperiodanddistributesthesetoregulatedentities.Coveredentitiesthatemitmorethan 25,000MTCO2e per yearmust complywith the Cap‐and‐Trade Program.4 Triggering of the 25,000

2 17CCR§§95800to96023.3 Seegenerally17CCR§§95811,95812.4 17CCR§95812.



MTCO2e per year “inclusion threshold” is measured against a subset of emissions reported and verifiedunder the California Regulation for the Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (MandatoryReportingRuleor“MRR”).5

Each covered entitywith a compliance obligation is required to surrender “compliance instruments”6 foreachMTCO2eofGHGtheyemit.Coveredentitiesareallocatedfreeallowancesinwholeorpart(ifeligible),buy allowances at auction, purchase allowances from others, or purchase offset credits. A “complianceperiod”isthetimeframeduringwhichthecomplianceobligationiscalculated.Theyears2013and2014arethe first compliance period, the years 2015–2017 are the second compliance period, and the thirdcomplianceperiodisfrom2018–2020.Attheendofeachcomplianceperiod,eachfacilitywillberequiredtosurrender compliance instruments to ARB equivalent to their total GHG emissions throughout thecomplianceperiod.Therealsoarerequirementstosurrendercomplianceinstrumentscovering30%oftheprioryear’scomplianceobligationbyNovemberofeachyear. Forexample, inNovember2014,acoveredentitywasrequiredtosubmitcomplianceinstrumentstocover30%ofits2013GHGemissions.

TheCap‐and‐TradeRegulationprovidesafirmcap,ensuringthatthe2020statewideemissionlimitwillnotbeexceeded.AninherentfeatureoftheCap‐and‐TradeProgramisthatitdoesnotguaranteeGHGemissionsreductionsinanydiscretelocationorbyanyparticularsource. Rather,GHGemissionsreductionsareonlyguaranteed on an accumulative basis. As summarizedbyCARB in its FirstUpdate to theClimateChangeScopingPlan:

TheCap‐and‐TradeRegulationgivescompaniesthe flexibilitytotradeallowanceswithothersortakestepstocost‐effectivelyreduceemissionsattheirownfacilities.Companiesthatemitmorehavetoturninmoreallowancesorothercomplianceinstruments.CompaniesthatcancuttheirGHGemissionshavetoturninfewerallowances.Butasthecapdeclines,aggregateemissionsmustbereduced.7

Inotherwords,acoveredentitytheoreticallycouldincreaseitsGHGemissionseveryyearandstillcomplywith theCap‐and‐TradeProgram. However, as climate change is a global phenomenon and the effects ofGHG emissions are considered cumulative in nature, a focus on aggregate GHG emissions reductions iswarranted.

Further,thereductionsinGHGemissionsthatwillbeachievedbytheCap‐and‐TradePrograminherentlyarevariableand,therefore,impossibletoquantifywithprecision:

TheCap‐and‐TradeRegulation isdifferent frommostoftheothermeasures intheScopingPlan. The[R]egulationsetsahardcap,insteadofanemissionlimit,sotheemissionreductionsfromtheprogramvaryasourestimatesof“businessasusual”emissionsinthefutureareupdated. Inaddition,theCap‐and‐Trade Program works in concert withmany of the direct regulatorymeasures—providing anadditional economic incentive to reduce emissions. Actions taken to complywith direct regulationsreduce an entity’s compliance obligation under the Cap‐and‐Trade Regulation. So, for example,

5 17CCR§§95100‐95158.6 Complianceinstrumentsarepermitstoemit,themajorityofwhichwillbe“allowances,”butentitiesalsoareallowedto

useARB‐approvedoffsetcreditstomeetupto8%oftheircomplianceobligations.7 CARB,FirstUpdatetotheClimateChangeScopingPlan:BuildingontheFramework,at86(May2014)(emphasisadded).



increaseddeploymentofrenewableelectricitysourcesreducesautility’scomplianceobligationundertheCap‐and‐TradeRegulation.8

If California’s direct regulatory measures reduce GHG emissions more than expected, then the Cap‐and‐TradeProgramwillberesponsibleforrelativelyfeweremissionsreductions.IfCalifornia’sdirectregulatorymeasuresreduceGHGemissionslessthanexpected,thentheCap‐and‐TradeProgramwillberesponsibleforrelativelymoreemissionsreductions.Inotherwords,theCap‐and‐TradeProgramfunctionssortoflikeaninsurancepolicyformeetingCalifornia2020’sGHGemissionsreductionmandate:

TheCap‐and‐TradeProgramestablishesanoveralllimitonGHGemissionsfrommostoftheCaliforniaeconomy—the “capped sectors.” Within the capped sectors, some of the reductions are beingaccomplishedthroughdirectregulations,suchasimprovedbuildingandapplianceefficiencystandards,the [Low Carbon Fuel Standard] LCFS, and the 33 percent [Renewables Portfolio Standard] RPS.Whateveradditionalreductionsareneededtobringemissionswithinthecapisaccomplishedthroughprice incentivesposedbyemissionsallowanceprices. Together,directregulationandprice incentivesassurethatemissionsarebroughtdowncost‐effectivelytotheleveloftheoverallcap.9

[T]heCap‐and‐TradeRegulationprovidesassurancethatCalifornia’s2020limitwillbemetbecausetheregulationsetsafirmlimiton85percentofCalifornia’sGHGemissions.10

In sum, the Cap‐and‐Trade Programwill achieve aggregate, rather than site‐specific or project‐level, GHGemissionsreductions.Also,duetotheregulatoryarchitectureadoptedbyCARBunderAB32,thereductionsattributedtotheCap‐and‐TradeProgramcanchangeovertimedependingontheState’semissionsforecastsandtheeffectivenessofdirectregulatorymeasures.

TheCap‐and‐TradeProgramcovers theGHGemissionsassociatedwithelectricity consumed inCalifornia,whether generated in‐state or imported.11 Accordingly, GHG emissions associated with CEQA projects’electricityusagewouldbecappedintheaggregateandsteadilyreducedbytheCap‐and‐TradeProgram.

The Cap‐and‐Trade Program also covers fuel suppliers (natural gas and propane fuel providers andtransportationfuelproviders)toaddressemissionsfromsuchfuelsandfromcombustionofotherfossilfuelsnotdirectlycoveredat largesources in theProgram’s firstcomplianceperiod.12 While theCap‐and‐TradeProgramtechnicallycoveredfuelsuppliersasearlyas2012,theydidnothaveacomplianceobligation(i.e.,theywerenotfullyregulated)until2015:

Suppliersofnaturalgas,suppliersofRBOB[ReformulatedGasolineBlendstockforOxygenateBlending]and distillate fuel oils, suppliers of liquefied petroleum gas, and suppliers of liquefied natural gas

8 Id.9 Id.at88.10 Id.at86‐87;seealsoCARB’s2013AnnualComplianceObligationoftheCap‐and‐TradeProgramreported100percentcompliance

forentitiessubjecttotheprogram(http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/2013compliancereport.xlsx).11 17CCR§95811(b).12 17CCR§§95811,95812(d).



specifiedinsections95811(c),(d),(e),(f),and(g)thatmeetorexceedtheannualthresholdinsection95812(d)willhaveacomplianceobligationbeginningwiththesecondcomplianceperiod.13

As of January 1, 2015, the Cap‐and‐Trade Program covered approximately 85% of California’s GHGemissions. The Cap‐and‐Trade Program covers the GHG emissions associated with the combustion oftransportation fuels in California, whether refined in‐state or imported. The point of regulation fortransportation fuels iswhen theyare “supplied” (i.e., delivered into commerce). However, transportationfuelsthatare“supplied”inCalifornia,butcanbedemonstratedtohaveafinaldestinationoutsideCalifornia,do not generate a compliance obligation. The underlying concept here is that ARB is seeking to capturetailpipe GHG emissions from the combustion of transportation fuels supplied to California end‐users.Accordingly, as with stationary source GHG emissions and GHG emissions attributable to electricity use,virtuallyall, ifnotall, ofGHGemissions fromCEQAprojects associatedwithvehicle‐miles traveled (VMT)would be capped in the aggregate and steadily reduced by the Cap‐and‐Trade Program. As discussed inmoredetailbelow,theSanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistricthastakenthispositioninitsrecentlyadoptedpolicy,effectivelyconcludingthatGHGemissionsassociatedwithVMTcannotconstitutesignificantincreasesunderCEQAstartingin2015.14

2. Volume 1, Section 4.E.3.a.(2) regarding methodology for the analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions,

Pages 4.E‐26 to 4.E‐27. Edit the sections of text beginning with the first paragraph on page 4.E‐26 and

ending at the end of the first full paragraph in the middle of Page 4.E‐27 as follows.

WithregardtothetargetsetbyExecutiveOrderS‐3‐05ofreducinggreenhousegasesto80percentbelow1990 levelsby2050, in contrast toAB32’smandate to return to1990emission levelsby2020, the2050target isnotmandatedby lawandconstitutesanaspirationalgoalsetby theCaliforniaExecutiveBranch.However, the Climate Change Scoping Plan recognizes that AB 32 establishes an emissions reductiontrajectorythatwillallowCaliforniatoachievethe2050target:“These[greenhousegasemissionreduction]measuresalsoputthestateonapathtomeetthelong‐term2050goalofreducingCalifornia’sgreenhousegas emissions to80percentbelow1990 levels. This trajectory is consistentwith the reductions that areneededgloballytohelpstabilizetheclimate.”15

CaliforniacourtshaveupheldasignificancethresholddefinedasthereductionbelowtheBAUlevelofGHGemissions calculated by CARB as necessary to achieve AB 32’s mandate. See Citizens for ResponsibleEquitableEnvironmentalDevelopmentv.CityofChulaVista,197Cal.App.4th327(Cal.App.4thDist.2011),reviewdeniedbyCASupremeCt.inCitizensforResponsibleEquitableEnvironmentalDevelopmentv.CityofChulaVista(TargetCorporation),2011Cal.LEXIS10785(Cal.Oct.19,2011);seealsoFriendsofOrovillev.CityofOroville,218Cal.App.4th1352(Cal.App.3rdDist.2013)(findingthatathresholdachievingAB32’smandate, or a reduction of approximately 15.8 percent from BAU, was a valid method to judge thesignificance of the project’s GHG emissions impacts).16 As indicated below, this section calculates and

13 Id.at§95851(b)(emphasisadded).14 San JoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict,CEQADeterminationsofSignificance forProjectsSubjecttoARB’sGHGCap‐and‐

TradeRegulation,APR–2030,at6(June25,2014).15 ClimateChangeScopingPlanat15.16 TheSecondAppellateDistrictCourtalsohasupheldtheuseofthisthresholdofsignificanceandhasnotedthatthe legalityofthis

methodologyhasbeenclearlyestablishedbytheaforementionedcases:“Standardsconcerningbaselinedeterminationsareclearlyestablished. Already, twoCourtofAppealdecisionshaveheldHealthandSafetyCodesection38550mayserveas thebasis fora

(Footnotecontinuedonnextpage)



disclosesProjectGHGemissionsagainst thebaseline,existingenvironmentalsetting. But thissectionalsousesacomparisonoftheProject’sGHGemissionsagainstexpectedemissionsiftheProjectwerebuiltusingBAU design, methodology, and technology. The BAU project GHG emissions calculated herein do notconstituteanimproperhypotheticalCEQAbaselinethathasnotoccurredorisunlikelytooccurinthefuture.Rather, theBAUprojectGHGemissionscalculatedhereinrepresenta reliableprojectionof emissions thataccounts for Climate Change Scoping Plan emission reduction measures already in place (e.g., Pavley IStandards and the 33 percent RPS). Moreover, the BAU project GHG emissions were calculated viaCalEEMod,whichisacomputermodeljointlydevelopedbytheSCAQMDtoquantifypotentialGHGemissionsassociatedwithboththeconstructionandoperationoflanduseprojects.

Thedisclosureofaproject’smassGHGemissions,whilenecessaryunderCEQA,generallydoesnotprovidelead agencieswith enough relevant data to permit informeddecision‐making. Given the global nature ofclimate change, selection of amass‐based GHG emissions significance threshold for an individual projectlikelywouldbespeculativeandnotsupportedbysubstantialevidence.

Aspopulationgrowthappearsinevitableandeconomicgrowthisbothlikelyanddesirable,acomparisontoBAU is a more useful tool for lead agencies to assess the relative carbon intensity and efficiency of aparticular project. In otherwords, unless a lead agency assumes Californiawill experience no economicgrowth in the future, the key consideration is not a CEQA project’s raw GHG emissions, but ratherwhatamountofeconomicdevelopmentandactivitywouldaccompanythoseemissions.

WhilethenotionofstatewideBAUusedinCARB’sClimateChangeScopingPlanisnotdirectlyapplicableatlocal or regional scales,17 the SCAQMD recommends use of CARB’s definition of BAU until such time as aSCAQMDorlocaldefinitionofBAUisdeveloped.18UseofAB32’sGHGemissionsreductionmandateattheproject‐level allows a comparison of GHG intensities to be made, which can inform a lead agency’sdetermination of whether an individual CEQA project is consistent with the State’s drive toward amorecarbon efficient future. Moreover, use Use of AB 32’s GHG emissions reductionmandate also provides acarefullycraftedtoolsupportedbysubstantialevidence(e.g.,studiesandanalysesreliedonbyCARBintheitsadoptionofandupdatingtotheClimateChangeScopingPlan)toassessthecontributiontoclimatechangeof a particular project. As explained inmore detail below, the GHG emission reductionmeasures in theClimateChangeScopingPlanputCaliforniaonapathtomeetthelong‐termGHGemissionsreductiongoalnecessarytostabilizetheclimate(i.e.,avoidinga2°Cincreaseinglobalaveragetemperatures).Accordingly,thiscarefullycraftedtoolalso isdirectly linkedwithconsiderationof theGHGemissionsandtemperatureincreasesmostoftenassociatedwithclimateimpacts.TheBAUprojectGHGemissionscalculatedhereindonotconstituteanimproperhypotheticalCEQAbaselinethathasnotoccurredor isunlikelytooccurinthefuture.Rather,theBAUprojectGHGemissionscalculatedhereinrepresentareliableprojectionofemissionsthataccounts forClimateChangeScopingPlanemissionreductionmeasuresalready inplace(e.g.,Pavley I

significancedetermination. HealthandSafetyCodesection38550ispartofAssemblyBillNo.32(2005‐2006Reg.Sess).” CourtofAppealofCalifornia,SecondAppellateDistrict,RecommendationAgainstPublication(April7,2014)(recommendingtoCaliforniaSupremeCourtthatunpublishedportionofopinion inCenterforBiologicalDiversityv.CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife(CaseNumberB245131)remainunpublished). ThisRecommendationAgainstPublicationandtherelatedopinionareattachedasappendicesheretoinAppendixE.

17 The statewideBAU isbasedonhistoric trendsacrossentireeconomic sectors,not theactivityof localgovernmentsor individualprojects(i.e.,itisatop‐downestimateofanticipatedfutureemissions).

18 SCAQMD,DraftGuidanceDocument‐InterimCEQAGHGSignificanceThreshold,AttachmentE,October2008.



Standards and the 33 percent RPS). Moreover, the BAU project GHG emissions were calculated viaCalEEMod,whichisacomputermodeljointlydevelopedbytheSCAQMDtoquantifypotentialGHGemissionsassociatedwithboththeconstructionandoperationoflanduseprojects.

ThenotionofstatewideBAUusedinCARB’sClimateChangeScopingPlanisnotdirectlyapplicableatlocalorregionalscales.Nevertheless,theSCAQMDrecommendsuseofCARB’sdefinitionofBAUuntilsuchtimeasaSCAQMD or local definition of BAU is developed.19 The statewide BAU is based on historic trends acrossentire economic sectors, not the activity of local governments or individual projects (i.e., it is a top‐downestimateofanticipatedfutureemissions).

Consequently,evaluatingthepropositionthataprojectconstitutesabreakfromBAUrequiresprovidingaquantitative estimateofBAUbasedon the specific circumstancesof theproject in the contextof relevantStateactivitiesandmandates.ThisessentiallyrequiresthreeGHGemissionsinventories(asfollows):

Baseline,existingenvironmentalsetting,GHGemissions;

BAUprojectGHGemissions;and

“Asproposed”projectGHGemissionswithprojectdesignfeatures.

3. Volume 1, Section 4.E.3(b) regarding Thresholds of Significance, Page 4.E‐30. Add the following

information at the end of the section, following the bullet at the top of the page as follows:

As indicated above, the CEQA Guidelines were amended in response to SB 97. In particular, the CEQAGuidelines were amended to specify that compliance with a GHG emissions reduction plan renders acumulativeimpactinsignificant.

PerCEQAGuidelinesSection15064(h)(3),aproject’sincrementalcontributiontoacumulativeimpactcanbefoundnotcumulativelyconsiderableiftheprojectwillcomplywithanapprovedplanormitigationprogramthatprovidesspecificrequirementsthatwillavoidorsubstantiallylessenthecumulativeproblemwithinthegeographicareaoftheproject.20Toqualify,suchaplanorprogrammustbespecifiedinlaworadoptedbythe public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources through a public review process toimplement,interpret,ormakespecificthelawenforcedoradministeredbythepublicagency.21Examplesofsuchprogramsincludea“waterqualitycontrolplan,airqualityattainmentormaintenanceplan,integratedwastemanagement plan, habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, [and] plans orregulations for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.”22 Put anotherway, CEQA Guidelines Section15064(h)(3) allows a lead agency to make a finding of non‐significance for GHG emissions if a projectcomplieswithplans, programs, and regulations to reduceGHGemissions, such as theCaliforniaCap‐and‐TradeProgram.

19 SCAQMD,DraftGuidanceDocument‐InterimCEQAGHGSignificanceThreshold,AttachmentE,October2008.20 14CCR§15064(h)(3).21 Id.22 Id.(emphasisadded).



TheSanJoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict(SJVAPCD)hastakenthisapproachviatheadoptionofapolicy to provide guidance to SJVAPCD staff on how to determine significance of GHG emissions fromprojects subject to the Cap‐and‐Trade Program or occurring at entities subject to the Cap‐and‐TradeProgram.23 By its terms, this policy applies bothwhen the SJVAPCD is the lead agency andwhen it is aresponsible agency under CEQA. The SJVAPCD “has determined that GHG emissions increases that arecovered under ARB’s Cap‐and‐Trade regulation cannot constitute significant increases under CEQA….”24OtherpertinentstatementsintheSJVAPCDpolicyareasfollows:

Consistentwith [14]CCR§15064(h)(3), theDistrict finds that compliancewithARB’sCap‐and‐Traderegulationwouldavoidor substantially lessen the impactofproject‐specificGHGemissionsonglobalclimatechange.…TheDistrictthereforeconcludesthatGHGemissionsincreasessubjecttoARB’sCap‐and‐Trade regulationwouldhavea less than significant individualand cumulative impactonglobalclimatechange.25

Insum,theSJVAPCDmodifieditsexistingCEQAsignificancethresholdforGHGemissionstoacknowledgetheprogressbeingmadebythestateinregulatingandreducingsuchemissions,inparticularwithregardtotheCap‐and‐TradeProgram.

As described inmore detail above, the design of the Cap‐and‐Trade Program assures reductions in GHGemissions. Accordingly, a project’s GHG emissions subject to the Cap‐and‐Trade Program should neithercount against a projectwhen assessing its significance underCEQAnor require furthermitigation. In itsrecentlyadoptedpolicy, theSJVAPCDhas taken thesamepositionon themitigationprovidedby theCap‐and‐TradeProgram:

[I]t isreasonable toconclude that implementationof theCap‐and‐Tradeprogramwillandmust fullymitigateproject‐specificGHGemissionsforemissionsthatarecoveredbytheCap‐and‐Traderegulation.…[T]heDistrictfindsthat,throughcompliancewiththeCap‐and‐Traderegulation,project‐specificGHGemissionsthatarecoveredbytheregulationwillbefullymitigated.26

Further, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has taken this position in CEQAdocuments itproducedasa leadagency. TheSCAQMDhaspreparedthreeNegativeDeclarationsandoneDraft Environmental Impact Report that demonstrate the SCAQMD has applied its 10,000 MTCO2e/yr.significance threshold in such a way that GHG emissions covered by the Cap‐and‐Trade Program do notconstituteemissionsthatmustbemeasuredagainstthethreshold.27

23 San JoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict,CEQADeterminationsofSignificance forProjectsSubjecttoARB’sGHGCap‐and‐

TradeRegulation,APR–2030(June25,2014).24 Id.at4.25 Id.at4‐5.26 San JoaquinValleyAirPollutionControlDistrict,CEQADeterminationsofSignificance forProjectsSubjecttoARB’sGHGCap‐and‐

TradeRegulation,APR–2030,at5(June25,2014).27 SCAQMD,FinalNegativeDeclarationfor: UltramarInc.WilmingtonRefineryCogenerationProject,SCHNo.2012041014(October

2014)(available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default‐source/ceqa/documents/permit‐projects/2014/ultramar_neg_dec.pdf?sfvrsn=2);SCAQMD,FinalNegativeDeclaration for: Phillips66LosAngelesRefineryCarsonPlant‐CrudeOilStorageCapacityProject,SCHNo.2013091029(December2014)(availableathttp://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default‐

(Footnotecontinuedonnextpage)



4. Volume 1, Section 4.E Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 3.c(1) Land Use Characteristics, Page 4.E‐30. Add

a reference to newly provide CAPCOA information at the end of the fourth paragraph in the section as

follows:

For reference purposes, selected pages from the CAPCOA guidance related to the discussion of VMT,including pages that discuss the land use transportation measures that would reduce Project VMT, areprovidedinAppendixB‐1oftheEIRErrata.ThefullCAPCOAguidancedocumentisavailablefordownloadonthe internetat the followingaddress: http://www.capcoa.org/wp‐content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA‐Quantification‐Report‐9‐14‐Final.pdf

5. Volume 1, Section 4.B Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 3.c(2) Project Design Features, Page 4.E‐33.

Revise PDF‐GHG‐1 as follows:


5. Volume 1, Section 4.E.3.a.(2) regarding Project impacts on Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Pages 4.E‐38.

Add new discussion regarding Consistency with Executive Orders S‐3‐05 and B‐30‐15 at the end of the

last paragraph on Page 4.E‐38 as follows:

(a) Consistency with Executive Orders S‐3‐05 and B‐30‐15]

Atthestatelevel,ExecutiveOrdersS‐3‐05andB‐30‐15areordersfromtheState’sExecutiveBranchforthepurposeofreducingGHGemissions.ExecutiveOrdersS‐3‐05’sgoalstoreduceGHGemissionsto1990levelsby2020wascodifiedby theLegislatureas the2006GlobalWarmingSolutionsAct (AB32). Asanalyzed

source/ceqa/documents/permit‐projects/2014/phillips‐66‐fnd.pdf?sfvrsn=2); FinalMitigatedNegativeDeclaration for: Toxic AirContaminantReductionforCompliancewithSCAQMDRules1420.1and1402attheExideTechnologiesFacilityinVernon,CA,SCHNo. 2014101040 (December 2014)( available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default‐source/ceqa/documents/permit‐projects/2014/exide‐mnd_final.pdf?sfvrsn=2); Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Breitburn Santa Fe Springs Blocks400/700 Upgrade Project, SCH No: 2014121014 (April 2015)(available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default‐source/ceqa/documents/permit‐projects/2015/deir‐breitburn‐chapters‐1‐3.pdf?sfvrsn=2).



above,theProjectisconsistentwithAB32.Therefore,theProjectdoesnotconflictwiththiscomponentoftheExecutiveOrders.

TheExecutiveOrdersalsoestablishthegoalstoreduceGHGemissionsto40below1990levelsby2030and80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. These goal have not yet been codified.28 However, studies haveshownthat, inordertomeetthe2030and2050targets,aggressivetechnologiesinthetransportationandenergy sectors, including electrification and the decarbonization of fuel, will be required. In its ClimateChangeScopingPlan,CARBacknowledged that the “measuresneeded tomeet the2050are too far in thefuture todefine indetail.”29 In theFirstUpdate,however,CARBgenerallydescribed the typeof activitiesrequired to achieve the 2050 target: “energy demand reduction through efficiency and activity changes;large‐scaleelectrificationofon‐roadvehicles,buildings,andindustrialmachinery;decarbonizingelectricityand fuel supplies; and rapidmarket penetration of efficiency and clean energy technologies that requiressignificant efforts to deploy and scale markets for the cleanest technologies immediately.”30 Due to thetechnologicalshiftsrequiredandtheunknownparametersoftheregulatoryframeworkin2030and2050,quantitatively analyzing the Project’s impacts further relative to the 2030 and 2050 goals currently isspeculative for purposes of CEQA. Moreover, ARB has not calculated and released the BAU emissionsprojectionsfor2030or2050,whicharenecessarydatapointsforquantitativelyanalyzingaCEQAproject’sconsistencywiththesetargets.

Although the proposed Project’s emissions levels in 2030 and 2050 cannot yet be reliably quantified,statewide efforts are underway to facilitate the State’s achievement of those goals and it is reasonable toexpecttheproposedProject’semissionslevel(8,905metrictonnesofCO2eperyearforcurrentlyproposedOption1)todeclineastheregulatoryinitiativesidentifiedbyCARBintheFirstUpdateareimplemented,andothertechnologicalinnovationsoccur.Stateddifferently,theproposedProject’semissionstotalatbuild‐outpresented in Table 4.E‐3 on page on Page 4.E‐37 of the Draft EIR, represents the maximum emissionsinventoryfortheProjectasCalifornia’semissionssourcesarebeingregulated(andforeseeablyexpectedtocontinuetoberegulatedinthefuture)infurtheranceoftheState’senvironmentalpolicyobjectives.Assuch,given the reasonably anticipated decline in proposed Project emissions once fully constructed andoperational,theproposedProjectisconsistentwiththeExecutiveOrders’goals.

TheClimateChangeScopingPlanrecognizesthatAB32establishesanemissionsreductiontrajectorythatwillallowCaliforniatoachievethemorestringent2050target:“These[greenhousegasemissionreduction]measuresalsoputthestateonapathtomeetthelong‐term2050goalofreducingCalifornia’sgreenhousegas emissions to80percentbelow1990 levels. This trajectory is consistentwith the reductions that areneededgloballytostabilizetheclimate.”31Also,CARB’sFirstUpdateprovidesthatit“laysthefoundationforestablishingabroadframeworkforcontinuedemissionreductionsbeyond2020,onthepathto80percent

28 ButseeSenateBill(SB)32,whichwillbeconsideredbytheStateLegislatureinJanuary2016,wouldcodifytheinterimgoalsetforthinExecutiveOrderB‐30‐15forGHGemissionslevelstobe40percentbelow1990levelsby2030.

29 CARB,ScopingPlan,p.117,December2008.30 CARB,FirstUpdate,p.32,May2014.31 ClimateChangeScopingPlanat15.



below1990levelsby2050,”andmanyoftheemissionreductionstrategiesrecommendedbyCARBwouldservetoreducetheproposedProject’spost‐2020emissionsleveltotheextentapplicablebylaw:32,33

EnergySector:ContinuedimprovementsinCalifornia’sapplianceandbuildingenergyefficiencyprograms and initiatives, such as the State’s zero net energy building goals, would serve toreduce the proposed Project’s emissions level.34 Additionally, further additions to California’srenewableresourceportfoliowouldfavorablyinfluencetheproposedProject’semissionslevel.35

TransportationSector: Anticipateddeploymentof improvedvehicleefficiency,zeroemissiontechnologies, lower carbon fuels, and improvement of existing transportation systems all willservetoreducetheproposedProject’semissionslevel.36

Water Sector: The proposed Project’s emissions level will be reduced as a result of furtherenhancementstowaterconservationtechnologies.37

WasteManagementSector: Plans to further improve recycling, reuse and reduction of solidwastewillbeneficiallyreducetheproposedProject’semissionslevel.38

While the 2020 cap would remain in effect post‐2020,39 the Cap‐and‐Trade Program is not currentlyscheduled to extend beyond 2020 in terms of additional GHG emissions reductions. However, ARB hasexpressed its intention to extend the Cap‐and‐Trade Program beyond 2020 in conjunctionwith setting amid‐termtarget.The“recommendedaction”intheFirstUpdatetotheClimateChangeScopingPlanfortheCap‐and‐Trade Program is: “Develop a plan for a post‐2020 Cap‐and‐Trade Program, including costcontainment, to provide market certainty and address a mid‐term emissions target.”40 The “expectedcompletiondate”forthisrecommendedactionis2017.41

In addition to CARB’s FirstUpdate, in January 2015, during his inaugural address, Governor JerryBrownexpressedacommitmenttoachieve“threeambitiousgoals”thathewouldliketoseeaccomplishedby2030to reduce the State’s GHG emissions: (1) increasing the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standard from 33percent in 2020 to 50 percent in 2030; (2) cutting the petroleum use in cars and trucks in half; and (3)

32 CARB,FirstUpdate,p.4,May2014.Seealsoid.atpp.32–33[recentstudiesshowthatachievingthe2050goalwillrequirethatthe

“electricity sector will have to be essentially zero carbon; and that electricity or hydrogen will have to power much of thetransportationsector,includingalmostallpassengervehicles.”]

33 CARB,FirstUpdate,Table6:SummaryofRecommendedActionsbySector,pp.94‐99,May2014.34 CARB,FirstUpdate,pp.37‐39,85,May2014.35 CARB,FirstUpdate,pp.40‐41,May2014.36 CARB,FirstUpdate,pp.55‐56,May2014.37 CARB,FirstUpdate,p.65,May2014.38 CARB,FirstUpdate,p.69,May2014.39 CaliforniaHealth&SafetyCode§38551(a)(“Thestatewidegreenhousegasemissionslimitshallremainineffectunlessotherwise

amendedorrepealed.”).40 CARB,FirstUpdatetotheClimateChangeScopingPlan:BuildingontheFramework,at98(May2014).41 Id.



doubling the efficiency of existing buildings and making heating fuels cleaner.42 These expressions ofExecutive Branch policymay bemanifested in adopted legislative or regulatory action through the stateagenciesanddepartmentsresponsibleforachievingtheState’senvironmentalpolicyobjectives,particularlythoserelatingtoglobalclimatechange.

Further, recent studies shows that the State’s existing andproposed regulatory frameworkwill allow theStatetoreduceitsGHGemissionslevelto40percentbelow1990levelsby2030,andto80percentbelow1990 levels by 2050. Even though these studies did not provide an exact regulatory and technologicalroadmaptoachievethe2030and2050goals,theydemonstratedthatvariouscombinationsofpoliciescouldallow the statewide emissions level to remain very low through2050, suggesting that the combinationofnewtechnologiesandotherregulationsnotanalyzedinthestudycouldallowtheStatetomeetthe2030and2050targets.43

Giventheproportionalcontributionofmobilesource‐relatedGHGemissionstotheState’sinventory,recentstudiesalsoshowthatrelativelynewtrends,suchastheincreasingimportanceofweb‐basedshopping,theemergence of different driving patterns by the “millennial” generation and the increasing effect ofWeb‐basedapplicationsontransportationchoices,arebeginningtosubstantiallyinfluencetransportationchoicesandtheenergyusedbytransportationmodes. Thesefactorshavechangedthedirectionof transportationtrends in recent years, and will require the creation of new models to effectively analyze futuretransportationpatternsandthecorrespondingeffectonGHGemissions.

Forthereasonsdescribedabove,theproposedProject’spost‐2020emissionstrajectoryisexpectedtofollowadecliningtrend,consistentwiththeestablishmentofthe2030and2050targets.

6. Volume 1, Section 4.E.4 regarding Cumulative Impacts on Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Page 4.E‐41.

Add the following information regarding CEQA Section 15064(h)(3) at the end of the Section as

follows:

ConsistentwithCEQAGuidelinesSection15064(h)(3),thissectionalsoprovidesaqualitativeestimateoftheProject’s compliance with plans, programs, and regulations that reduce a project’s GHG emissions eitherdirectly or indirectly, including: the California Cap‐and‐Trade Program; the California Green BuildingStandardsCode;SCAG’s2012–2035RTP/SCS;theCityofLosAngelesGreenBuildingCode;andGreenLA,AnActionPlantoLeadtheNationinFightingGlobalWarming. Asdescribedabove,theProjectwouldcomplywithState, regional, and localplans,programs,andregulations that reduceGHGemissions. Indeed,manyProject‐related emissions would be capped in the aggregate and steadily reduced by the Cap‐and‐Trade

42 Transcript:Governor JerryBrown’s January5,2015, InauguralAddress,www.latimes.com/local/political/la‐me‐pc‐brown‐speech‐

text‐20150105‐story.html#page=1,accessedMarch2,2015.43 EnergyandEnvironmentalEconomics(E3),“SummaryoftheCaliforniaStateAgencies’PATHWAYSProject:Long‐termGreenhouse

Gas Reduction Scenarios” (April 2015); Greenblatt, Jeffrey, Energy Policy, “Modeling California Impacts on Greenhouse GasEmissions” (Vol. 78, pp. 158‐172). TheCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard,CaliforniaEnergyCommission,CaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommission,andtheCaliforniaIndependentSystemOperatorengagedE3toevaluatethefeasibilityandcostofarangeofpotential2030targetsalongthewaytothestate’sgoalofreducingGHGemissionsto80%below1990levelsby2050. Withinputfromtheagencies,E3developedscenariosthatexplorethepotentialpaceatwhichemissionreductionscanbeachievedaswellasthemixoftechnologiesandpracticesdeployed.E3conductedtheanalysisusingitsCaliforniaPATHWAYSmodel.Enhancedspecificallyforthisstudy,themodelencompassestheentireCaliforniaeconomywithdetailedrepresentationsofthebuildings,industry,transportation,andelectricitysectors.



Program, such as energy, mobile, and construction emissions.44 Therefore, per CEQA Guidelines Section15064(h)(3), the Project’s impactswith respect to GHG emissionswould be less than significant and notcumulativelyconsiderable.

Moreover, under the CEQAGuidelines Section 15064(h)(3) approach used by the SCAQMD, the followingcategoriesofemissions,ataminimum,wouldnotcountagainsttheSCAQMD’s10,000MTCO2e/yr.thresholddue to their coverage by theCap‐and‐TradeProgram: Construction;On‐RoadMobile Sources; Electricity;NaturalGas;andStationary(EmergencyGenerator). ForthecurrentlyproposedProjectOption1,theGHGemissionsfromcategoriespotentiallynotcoveredbytheCap‐and‐TradeProgram(Area,Water/WastewaterConveyance,andWaste)wouldbe638MTCO2e/yr.,outofa totalof8,905MTCO2e/yr. Insum,assessingsignificanceviatheSCAQMDapproachdescribedhereinwouldresultinthesamefindingthattheProject’sclimatechangeimpactsarelessthansignificantandnotcumulativelyconsiderable.

Section 4.H Land Use

1. Volume 1, Land Use Section 4.H.3.c, Project Characteristics, Page 4.H.21. Insert the following new

Project Design Feature at the end of the list of necessary approvals as shown:

InadditiontotheserequiredNecessaryApprovals,theProjectApplicanthasproposedthefollowingProjectDesignFeature:

PDF‐LandUse‐1: Prior to the issuance of a building permit for above grade construction for theProject, theApplicantshalleither(1)recordacovenant to tie theProjectSite’s twolots;or(2)recordaphaseofanapprovedtractmapfortheProjectwhichmergestheSite’stwolotsintoonemastergroundlot.

2. Volume 1, Land Use Section 4.H.3.d.(2)(c), Analysis of Project Consistency with the Hollywood

Redevelopment Plan, Page 4.H‐48. Add the information and analysis regarding consistency with the

Hollywood Redevelopment plan as provided below. This added information to the analysis on page

4.H‐48 of the Draft EIR accompanies and follows additional information that was added to this

analysis on Pages 2‐36 through 2‐37 of the Final EIR.

The above cited provision of Section 506.2.3 and the related analysis address considerations regardingcharacteristicsofaprojectthatwouldqualifyforanincreaseinFARof4.5:1to6.0:1. Section506.2.3alsoincludesadditionalprovisionthatrefertotheresponsibilitiesoftheAgencyandlogisticsofapproval.Theseprovisionsareasfollows:

o Nodevelopmentinexcessof4.5:1shallbepermittedwithoutabindingwrittenagreementwiththe Agency which ensures that the proposed development will occur in conformity to theRedevelopmentPlanandthisSectionbyprovidingfor,amongotherthings,Agencyreviewandapproval of all plans and specifications, the compliance with all conditions applicable to

44 SeealsoSection4.H,LandUseandPlanningforadditionalrelevantanalysesoftheProject’sconsistencywithotherregulatoryplansand policies that are pertinent to the general concepts of “smart growth,” environmental sustainability, and the efficientuse ofresources.



development in excess of a 4.5:1 site F.A.R. and the provision of adequate assurances andconsiderationsforthepurposeofeffectuatingtheobjectivesofthisPlan.

TheProjectapplicanthas initiatedanapplication foranOwnerParticipationAgreement (OPA)with the Designated Local Authority (DLA), and a copy of this initiation letter is provided asAppendixD‐1ofthisErrata.Whileredevelopmentagencieshavebeendissolved,theHollywoodRedevelopment Plan is effective until 2033. Pursuant to the legislation pertaining to thedissolution of redevelopment agencies, the DLA is obligated to carry out the HollywoodRedevelopmentPlanuntilthatdate,andtheDLAhastheauthorityto,amongotherthings,satisfytherequirementstoallowforanincreaseinfloorarearatio("FAR")ofupto6:1bymakingtherequisite findings, as well as enter into a binding written agreement – just as the formerredevelopmentagencywasableto.

Further, conformity with the above Hollywood Redevelopment Plan requirement is also metthroughthefollowingproposedDLimitation:

ProposedDLimitation:

AprojectonthissitemaybedevelopedataFloorAreaRatio(FAR)ofbetween4.5:1andnottoexceed6.0:1providedthat:

a. TheCommunityRedevelopmentAgency,anysuccessortotheCommunityRedevelopmentAgency, or the Department of City Planning of Los Angeles pursuant to the transfer byordinanceofredevelopmentlanduseplansandfunctionstotheCityofLosAngeles(C.F.No.12‐0014‐S4), finds that the project conforms to the Hollywood Redevelopment Plan withfindings as required by Sec. 506.2.3 of the Redevelopment Plan and approves an OwnerParticipationAgreement;

o TheAgencyshallrequestfromthePlanningCommissionadeterminationastotheconformityoftheproposeddevelopmentwiththeCommunityPlan.ThePlanningCommissionshallmake itsdeterminationofconformitywithin thirty (30)days from thedateof theAgency'srequest. Aproposed development shall be deemed in conformance with the Community Plan if thePlanningCommissionfailstorenderadeterminationwithinthirty(30)days. AdeterminationbythePlanningCommissionmaybeappealedtotheCityCouncilifsuchappealismadewithinfifteen(15)daysofthePlanningCommission'sdetermination.

Prior tomaking a determination allowing the 6.0:1 FAR for the Project, the DLAmustmeet theabove provision regarding conformity of the Project to the Community Plan. The City PlanningCommissionwillmake a determination as to conformity and consistency of the Projectwith theCommunity Plan as part of its recommendation on the proposed General Plan Amendment andZoneChange.

o The Agency will ensure that the average floor area ratio within this [Regional CenterCommercial] designation does not exceed an F.A.R. of 4.5:1. Sites designated on theRedevelopmentPlanMapasPublicshallnotbeincludedintheaveragingofthefloorarearatio.This shallbedone, from time to time, to theextentnecessary,bycreatinganoverallbalancebetweennewdevelopmentswhichexceeda4.5:1siteF.A.R.andareasoractivitieswhichdonot



reacha4.5:1 siteF.A.R. suchasopen spacesorpublic facilitiescreatedor rehabilitatedafteradoptionoftheRedevelopmentPlan;newdevelopmentsorredevelopmentactivities(includinghistoricpreservationorrehabilitation)whicharebelow4.5:1;oranyothermeanstheAgencydeemsappropriatewhichwillmaintainthedesignation'saverageF.A.R.atorbelow4.5:1.WhentheaverageF.A.R. for thedesignationreachesaratioof2.0:1 theAgency,within90dayswillsubmittothePlanningCommission,theCityCouncil,andtheDepartmentofTransportationareportanalyzingthecumulativeimpactofCoreareadevelopmentuponthetransportationandcirculation system in the area, includingP.M. peak hour trips generated; further theAgencyshall submit to theCityPlanningCommissionand to theCityCouncilaprogramestablishingand identifying specificmethodsandmechanisms ofAgencyaction toacquire open space orotherwiserestrictordecreasedensityinordertomaintainanoverall4.5:1F.A.R.

TheDLAhasmonitored,andcontinuestomonitor,developmentinpropertieswithadesignationofRegionalCenterCommercialwithintheHollywoodRedevelopmentPlanareaasrequiredinSection506.2.3.TheDLAhaspreparedaletterdatedNovember3,2015thatisincludedasAppendixD‐2tothisErrata 1.As indicated in the letter, the4.5:1 averageFARhasnot been reached. Therefore,approvaloftheProjectatadensityof6.0:1ispermitted.

Section 4.I Noise

1. Volume 1, Noise Section 4.I.2.b, Existing Conditions, Page 4.I‐5. Add the following to the end of the

discussion of (1) Noise Sensitive Receptors Locations as follows:

Pursuant toCEQA, theexistingbaseline forEIRs is typicallybasedonexistingusesat the timeaNoticeofPreparation(NOP)isissued. TheNOPforthePalladiumResidencesprojectwasissuedonAugust8,2013,and thenoise analysis commenced soon thereafter. TheHollywoodLeBonHotel, located at 1610ArgyleAvenue, was not identified as a sensitive receptor at the time of the NOP or start of the noise analysis,becauseaccordingtoitswebsite,itdidnotopenuntilNovember2013.45Priortoitsrenovationintoahotel,thepropertywasanofficebuilding,46which isnotanoise‐sensitiveuseunderCEQA. As thehotel isnowoccupied,ananalysisofthepotentialconstructionnoiselevelstotheLeBonHotelhasbeenperformed.TheLeBonHotelislocatedapproximately200feetfromtheProjectSite.

2. Volume 1, Noise Section 4.I.2.b, Existing Conditions, Page 4.I‐6. Revise the second bullet in the list

of future related projects as follows:

RelatedProject9:BLVD6200.Mixed‐usemultifamilyresidentialproject,locatedapproximately250200feetnorthoftheProjectSite.

45 http://www.loopnet.com/Listing/16552621/1610‐Argyle‐Ave‐Hollywood‐CA/?PgCxtGuid=121c67ad‐6b27‐4e1c‐a409‐

63fce611d186&PgCxtFLKey=ProfileSE&PgCxtCurFLKey=PropertyRecord&PgCxtDir=Up,AccessedSeptember11,2015.46 http://www.loopnet.com/Listing/16552621/1610‐Argyle‐Ave‐Hollywood‐CA/?PgCxtGuid=121c67ad‐6b27‐4e1c‐a409‐

63fce611d186&PgCxtFLKey=ProfileSE&PgCxtCurFLKey=PropertyRecord&PgCxtDir=Up,AccessedSeptember11,2015.



3. Volume 1, Noise Section 4.I.3.d.(1) Construction Impacts, Page 4.I‐25. Add the following text after

Table 4.I‐7 as follows:

AsdescribedintheSettingSectionabove,theLeBonHotelwasnotanexistinguseatthetimetheNOPfortheProjectwasissued,howeverhassincebeenredevelopedfromanofficeusetoahoteluse. Ananalysishasbeenperformedtoidentifytheconstructionnoiseimpactsatthatlocation.Theanalysisconcludesthattheconstructionnoiselevelscouldreach75dBA,whichwouldexceedthesignificancethresholdof68dBAatlocation R4. Therefore, the mitigation noise measure, MM‐NOISE‐1, has been modified to account forimpactsattheLeBonHotelresultinginlessthansignificantimpactsatthatlocation.ThecalculationworksheetforthatestimateofconstructionnoiseattheLeBonHotelisincludedinAppendixC‐1ofthisErrata1.

4. Volume 1, Noise Section 4.I.3.d.(1) Construction Impacts, Page 4.I‐26. Add the following text prior

to Table 4.I‐7 as follows:

RelatedProject 9, BLVD6200,waspreviously reported in theExistingConditions Section above as beinglocatedapproximately250feetfromtheProjectSite.Thatdistancehasbeenmeasuredagainandhasbeenrevisedto200feetasindicatedabove.TheclosestreceptortothatlocationisR4,withanexistingnoiselevelof 63dBAand significance thresholdof 68dBA. That locationwas included in theanalysisof impacts atexisting sensitive receiver locations in Table 4.I‐7. As noted above, a subsequent analysis has beenperformedforimpactsattheLeBonHotel,whichislocatedapproximately200feetfromtheProjectSiteatreceptorlocationR‐4.Thatanalysisconcludesthattheconstructionnoiselevelscouldreach75dBA,whichwouldexceedthesignificancethresholdof68dBAat locationR4;andthereforemitigationnoisemeasure,MM‐NOISE‐1, has been modified to address this impact. As the BLVD 6200 project is also located atapproximately200feetaway,andatthesamereceptorlocation,theanalysisandmitigationfortheLeBonHotelwouldapplytothepotentialimpactsfortheBLVD6200projectaswell.

5. Volume 1, Noise Section 4.I.3.d.(1)(b) Off‐Site Construction Noise, Page, 4.I‐27. Add a note at the

end of the analysis, as follows:

ThedatainNoiseAppendixH‐1.3hasbeenreplacedwithcorrecteddatathatisconsistentwiththisSection4.INoiseanalysis. ThepreviousversionoftheAppendixwasincorrect. ThecorrectversionofthedataisincludedintheErrataAppendixC‐2.ThedatamatchestheanalysisdataintheEIRsectionanddoesnotaltertheconclusionsofthatanalysis.

6. Volume 1, Noise Section 4.I.3.d.(2)(a) Operational Off‐Site Roadway Traffic Noise analysis, Page,

4.I‐28. Add a note at the end of the analysis, as follows:

Draft EIR Noise Appendix H‐1.5 has the work sheets for this analysis; and the Appendix has beensupplemented with additional information regarding roadway information (number of lanes, lane width,parking lanewidthandsidewalkwidthaswellascruisespeed).Theaddedinformation isprovidedintheErrataAppendixC‐3.

7. Volume 1, Noise Section 4.I.3.d.(4) Vibration Impacts, Page 4.I‐40. Revise footnote 24 at the

bottom of the page to reflect added information regarding the analysis of vibration:

“VibrationsestimatesarebasedonguidanceintheTransportation‐andConstruction‐InducedVibrationGuidance Manual, California Department of Transportation, Environmental Program, Environmental



Engineering,Noise,Vibration, andHazardousWasteManagementOffice, June2004: PPVequip =PPVref(25/D)n;where PPVref = reference source vibration, D = Distance, n =factor for soil attenuation. Forthese calculations the N value is 1.1, the distance is approximately 5.5 feet for operation of caissondrilling.”

8. Volume 1, Noise Section 4.I.4, Mitigation Measures, Page 4.I‐44. Revise Mitigation Measure MM‐

NOISE‐1, as follows:

MM‐NOISE‐1: Temporaryconstructionnoisebarriersshallbeimplementedasfollows:

TheProjectshallensuretheprovisionofa5dBAnoisebarrierbetweentheProject construction and the existing residential development on thenorthwest corner of Selma Avenue and Argyle Avenue (existing buildingsbetween the residential development and the Project at the time ofconstructionmay contribute to the soundattenuation).; and an 8dBA, 16foothighnoisebarrierbetweentheProjectandtheLeBonHotel(allowingforagatethatmaybeopenedfromtimetotimeforSiteentry).

IfthefollowingrelatedprojectsadjacenttotheProjectSite(i.e.atColumbiaSquare, the Selma and Vine project, the BLVD 6200 project south ofHollywood Boulevard, or 6250 Sunset project) are occupied by newresidentsatthetimeofProjectconstruction,thentemporarynoisebarriersshall be provided between the Project construction and those occupiedunits. Based on the exceedance of the thresholds noted in the aboveanalysis(giventhedistancefromtheProjectSiteandexistingsoundlevelsattherespectivelocations),thebarriersshallprovideasoundreductionof5 dBA between the Project Site and the 6250 Sunset project, andapproximately 10 dBA between the Project and the remaining futureprojects.

Section 4.L Transportation and Circulation

1. Volume 1, Transportation and Circulation Section 4.L.2.a.(2) Street System. Add updated

information per Consistency with the Mobility Plan 2035, on Page 4.L‐6, at the end of the Street

System Section as follows.

ConsistencywithMobilityPlan2035

SubsequenttopreparationofthePalladiumResidencesDraftEIRinOctober2014andtheFinalEIRinMarch2015,theCityofLosAngelesadopteditsnewMobilityPlan2035,AnElementoftheGeneralPlan(LosAngelesDepartment of Planning, approved August 2015) (“Mobility Element 2035”).47 The street descriptionsprovided on pages 4.L‐2 through 4.L‐6 of the Draft EIR mentioned both the then‐current (now old)designation for each street as well as the designation as proposed in the Draft Mobility Plan 2035 as it

47 AlthoughMobilityElement2035hasbeenchallenged intheLosAngelesSuperiorCourt,thisanalysis is included intheeventthat

MobilityElement2035isupheld.IfMobilityElement2035isoverturned,theanalysisintheEIRwillstillbeaccurate.Ineithercase,nochangeinthelevelofimpactswouldoccur.



existedatthattime.Forcompleteness,eachofthestreetsdescribedintheDraftEIRislistedagainwithitsfinaldesignationpertheadoptedMobilityElement2035:

SantaMonicaBoulevard–ModifiedAvenueI,TransitEnhancedNetwork

FountainAvenue–CollectorStreet,NeighborhoodEnhancedNetwork

SunsetBoulevard–AvenueI,VehicleEnhancedNetwork

SelmaAvenue–LocalStreet,NeighborhoodEnhancedNetwork(westofElCentroAvenue)

HollywoodBoulevard–AvenueI,TransitEnhancedNetwork,BicycleEnhancedNetwork

FranklinAvenue–AvenueIIeastofCahuengaBoulevard,AvenueIIIwestofCahuengaBoulevard,NeighborhoodEnhancedNetwork

WilcoxAvenue–ModifiedAvenueIII

CahuengaBoulevard–AvenueII,NeighborhoodEnhancedNetwork(ColeAvenuetoHollywoodBoulevard),BicycleLaneNetwork(northofYuccaStreet)

IvarAvenue–ModifiedLocalStreet

VineStreet–AvenueII,BicycleLaneNetwork(southofYuccaStreet)

Argyle Avenue – Local Street, Neighborhood Enhanced Network (Selma Avenue to FranklinAvenue)

ElCentroAvenue–LocalStreet,NeighborhoodEnhancedNetwork(DeLongpreAvenuetoSelmaAvenue)

Gower Street – Modified Avenue III, Neighborhood Enhanced Network (south of De LongpreAvenue)

GordonStreet–LocalStreet

Bronson Avenue – Avenue III, Neighborhood Enhanced Network (Carlton Way to HollywoodBoulevard)

VanNessAvenue–ModifiedCollectorStreet,NeighborhoodEnhancedNetwork(southofHaroldWay)

ThesefinaldesignationsdonotchangeanyoftheanalysesorconclusionsofthetransportationimpactstudyfortheDraftEIR.

Withthesedesignations,thethreestreetsthatimmediatelybordertheProjectsitehavestandardroadwaydimensionsestablishedintheMobilityElement2035asfollows:



SunsetBoulevard–70’roadwayin100’right‐of‐way(ROW)(35’half‐widthroadwayin50’half‐width ROW). These dimensions are consistent with the recommendation in the LADOTAssessmentLetterfortheProject(AppendixK‐2totheDraftEIR),whichrecommendedthattheapplicantberequiredtoprovidea35’half‐widthroadwayanda50’half‐widthROWalongSunsetBoulevard.

SelmaAvenue,ArgyleAvenue,andElCentroAvenue–36’roadwayin60’ROW(18’half‐widthroadwayin30’half‐widthROW).Thesedimensionsarenotconsistentwiththerecommendationin the LADOT Assessment Letter for the Project, which recommended that the applicant berequiredtoprovidea20’half‐widthroadwayanda30’half‐widthROWalongthesestreets.TheLADOTrecommendationwasbasedontheolderrequirementsforcommerciallocalstreets,notthenewMobilityElement2035. Eachof thesestreetscurrentlyhasanexistingroadwaywidthequaltoorexceeding40’andexistingROWwidthsequaltoorexceeding60’,however,consistentwiththeoriginalLADOTrecommendationandexceedingtheMobilityPlan2035dimensions,andthusnoroadwaywideningorROWdedicationisrequiredfortheproposedproject.

2. Volume 1, Transportation and Circulation Section 4.L.3.(e) Regional Public Transit System, (i)

Impacts on Existing 2013 Baseline. Revise the first paragraph on Page 4.L‐56 as follows.

(i) Impacts Based on Existing 2013 Baseline

TheTrafficReportestimated thenumberofProject residentsandvisitors thatwouldride transitvehiclesduring the A.M. and P.M. peak hours based on the CMP recommended methodology. Following thisapproach,Option1wouldgenerateanestimated3539and3943transitridersinA.M.andP.M.peakhour,respectively,fromresidentialuseand11and14transitridersinA.M.andP.M.peakhour,respectively,fromcommercial uses, or a total of 46 and 53 transit riders inA.M. andP.M. peak hour respectively. Option 2would generate an estimated 29 and 32 transit riders in A.M. and P.M. peak hour, respectively, fromresidentialuseand39and48transitridersinA.M.andP.M.peakhour,respectivelyfromcommercialuses.Thetotalridershipwouldbe46and53transitridersinA.M.andP.M.peakhour,respectively,underOption1and68and80transitridersinA.M.andP.M.peakhour,respectively,underOption2.

3. Volume 1, Transportation and Circulation Section 4.L.4.b, Discussion of the Mitigation Measures for

operations, Page 4.L‐64. Add after the second full paragraph and prior to the list of mitigation

measures the following text regarding the elimination of the Project Option 2, Residential/Hotel as

follows:

As discussed in the general/global revision to the EIR, the Project no longer includes Project Option 2,Residential/Hotel, therefore impactsassociatedsolelywith thisOption2wouldbeeliminated. ImpactsofOption 1 remain as shown in the analyses above and continue to require mitigation pursuant to CEQAGuidelines.

With the elimination of Option 2, significant traffic impacts would no longer be generated at twointersectionsforwhichfeasiblemitigationhadbeenpreviouslyidentified:theCahuengaBoulevard/FranklinAvenueandGowerStreet/FranklinAvenueintersections. Similarly, thesignificant impact identifiedattheresidentialstreetsegmentofElCentroAvenuebetweenLelandWayandDeLongpreAvenue,duringexistingconditions, also not occur. Therefore, MitigationMeasuresMM‐TRAF‐7 andMM‐TRAF‐10 are no longerrequiredandhavebeendeleted,withrenumberingofMM‐TRAF‐8toMM‐TRAF‐7,asfollows:



MM‐TRAF‐7: TheProjectshallimplementthefollowingphysicalroadwayimprovementsthatcan be providedwithin existing roadwaywidthswithout requiring removal ofparkingspaces:

Intersection2,CahuengaBoulevard&FranklinAvenue.Modifythesignalequipmentandoperationtoallowasouthboundprotectedleft‐turnmovementwithawestboundright‐turn overlap. This improvement will require the southbound U‐turns at theintersectiontoberestricted.

Intersection 23, Gower Street & Franklin Avenue. Coordinate with the ColumbiaSquareprojectandLADOTtoarrangeforapotentialfairsharecontributiontowardstheimplementationofanimprovementproposedbytheColumbiaSquareprojectthatwould upgrade the traffic signal equipment to allow for northbound right‐turnoverlap.

MM‐TRAF‐10: TheProjectshallfundandcoordinateimplementationofaTrafficCalmingPlan

toreduceProjectimpactsonElCentroAvenuebetweenSantaMonicaBoulevardand Sunset Avenue. The Plan shall be approved by LADOT and includecommunity consultation coordinated through the Council Office on the finalselectionofcalmingmeasuresincluded.Itshallincludesuchphysicalmeasuresas changes in street alignment, installation of barriers, speed humps, speedtables, raised crosswalks, chicanes, and chokers, and/or operationalmeasuressuchasturnrestrictions,speedlimits,andinstallationofstopsigns.

4. Volume 1, Transportation and Circulation Section 4.L.4.b, Mitigation Measures for TDM program,

Page 4.L‐65, after the last mitigation measure in the Section. Add information regarding LADOT

recommendations for the TDM and revise the TDM program as follows:

EnhancementstotheTransportationDemandManagementProgram

TheLADOTAssessmentLetterforthePalladiumResidencesProject(AppendixK‐2totheDraftEIR)statesthattheProject’sTDMprogramshouldincludethefollowing:

CoordinatewithLADOTtodetermineifthesitewouldbeeligibleforoneormoreoftheservicestobeprovidedbythefutureMobilityHubsprogram(securebikeparking,bike‐sharekiosks,andcar‐shareparkingspaces).

Contribute a one‐time fixed‐fee of $100,000 to be deposited into the City’s Bicycle Plan TrustFundtoimplementbicycleimprovementswithintheareaoftheproposedproject.

Guaranteedridehomeprogram.

Consider joining the Hollywood TransportationManagement Organization (TMO) thatmay becreatedbyothermajoremployersinHollywoodinthenextfewyears.

The Mobility Hubs program is an LADOT program intended to expand the reach of the regional transitsystemtosurroundingneighborhoodsbyofferingservicessuchassecuredbikeparking,bikesharing,“fold‐n‐go”bike leasingprograms,privatetransportservices(e.g.,Uber,Car2Go,Lyft,ZipCar), integratedtransit



passpurchase,centralizedweb‐basedtripplanning,real‐timeroutingandtransitscheduleinformation,andother transportation informationatavarietyof locationsaround theCity toexpand the travel choices forresidents,employees,andvisitorswhilereducingtheneedtoownavehicle.Theprogramisexpectedtobeimplementedbeginningin2017.

With regard to theHollywood TMO,MitigationMeasure K‐1 in the Draft EIR for the Paramount PicturesMaster Plan Project (City of Los Angeles, September 2015) requires that the Paramount Pictures projectapplicant initiate, fund, and market a Hollywood‐area TMO. The LADOT Assessment Letter for theParamount Pictures project (Appendix R of the Paramount Pictures Draft EIR) further clarifies that theParamountPicturesprojectapplicantwouldprovideseedfundingtolaunchtheHollywoodTMOaswellasongoingfundingtocoveraportionofthecosttooperatetheTMO.

Giventheabove,MM‐TRAF‐9isrevisedasfollows:

MM‐TRAF‐98: The Project shall implement a travel demand management (TDM) program,consistentwiththerecommendationsofLADOT.Theexactmeasurestobeimplementedwillbedeterminedwhen theplan isprepared,prior to issuanceof a final certificateofoccupancyfortheProject.TheTDMprogramshallensureappropriateimplementationoftheProject’ssidewalks/plazas,streettrees/landscaping,streetandpedestrianamenities,lightingandbicycleprovisionstoencouragealternativemodesoftransportation.Itshallalsoincludeotherfeaturesasappropriate,suchas,forexample,unbundledparking,(i.e.separatingthecostofpurchasingorrentingparkingspacesfromthecostofpurchasingorrentingadwellingunit);rideshareprograms,(whichcouldincludetheprovisionofanon‐sitetransitandrideshareinformationcenterthatprovidesassistancetohelppeopleformcarpools or access transit alternatives, and/or priority parking for carpools); and/or atransit pass discount program, (that typically includes negotiating with transit serviceproviderstopurchasetransitpassesinbulkatadiscountedratewithresaletointerestedresidents or employees at discounted prices), identification of an on‐site TDMcoordinator, making information available to residents and employees regardingalternativetransportationoptions,monitoringandsurveyingrequirements,aguaranteedride home program, participation in the LADOT Mobility Hubs program (which couldinclude secure bike parking, bike‐share kiosks, car‐share parking spaces and services,and/or electric scooter‐share), contributing a one‐time fixed‐fee of $100,000 to bedeposited into theCity’sBicycleTrust fund to implementbicycle improvementswithinthe area of the Project, and/or participation in the Hollywood TransportationManagementOrganization(TMO)tobecreatedbyothermajoremployersinHollywoodwithinthenextfewyears.TheProjectisalsoprovidingamplebicycleparkingandon‐sitebicyclerepairfacilitiesincompliancewithLosAngelesCityMunicipalCoderequirements.



Thispageintentionallyblank.

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCHNo.2013081022 E‐1

E. EFFECTS OF CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS

This Errata documents additional changes to the EIR (comprised of the Draft EIR and Final EIR). Asdemonstrated by the following discussion, the modifications to the EIR do not result in new significantimpactsanddonotwarrantrecirculationoftheEIR.

CEQAGuidelinesSection15088.5requiresthatanEIRthathasbeenmadeavailable forpublicreview,butpriortofinalcertification,berecirculatedonlyifsignificantnewinformationhasbeenaddedtotheEIR.TherelevantportionsofCEQAGuidelinessection15088.5readasfollows:

(a) A leadagency isrequiredtorecirculateanEIRwhensignificantnew information isaddedtotheEIRafterpublicnoticeisgivenoftheavailabilityofthedraftEIRforpublicreviewunderSection15087butbeforecertification. Asusedinthissection,theterm“information”canincludechangesintheprojectorenvironmentalsettingaswellasadditionaldataorotherinformation.NewinformationaddedtoanEIR isnot “significant”unless theEIR is changed inaway thatdeprives thepublicofameaningfulopportunity tocommentuponasubstantialadverseenvironmentaleffectof theprojectora feasibleway tomitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project’sproponentshavedeclinedtoimplement.“Significantnewinformation”requiringrecirculationinclude,forexample,adisclosureshowingthat:

(1) Anewsignificantenvironmental impactwouldresult fromtheprojector fromanewmitigationmeasureproposedtobeimplemented.

(2) A substantial increase in the severityofanenvironmental impactwouldresultunlessmitigationmeasuresareadoptedthatreducetheimpacttoalevelofinsignificance.

(3) Afeasibleprojectalternativeormitigationmeasureconsiderablydifferentfromotherspreviouslyanalyzed would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, but the project’sproponentsdeclinetoadoptit.

(4) The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature thatmeaningfulpublicreviewandcommentwereprecluded.

(b) RecirculationisnotrequiredwherethenewinformationaddedtotheEIRmerelyclarifiesoramplifiesormakesinsignificantmodificationsinanadequateEIR.

TheErrataprovideinformationregardingminorrevisionstotheProject,clarificationsandminoreditstotheDraftandFinalEIRdocuments,andnewtechnicalanalyses.AlloftheinformationaddedtotheEIRupdates,clarifies,corrects,addsto,ormakesinsignificantmodificationstoinformationintheDraftandFinalEIR.

ThedevelopmentrefinementstotheProject,includingreducingtheProjectheightsandeliminatingthehoteluses, would reduce Project impacts from the level of impacts reported in the EIR. Modifications to theentitlement requests would not change the Project or its impacts on the environment. They provideclarifications regardingProject implementationprocedures. Newand/or revisedmitigationmeasuresaremore protective of the environment and do not generate impacts on the environment beyond those

E. Effects of Corrections and Additions November 2015

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCHNo.2013081022 E‐2

describedintheEIR.AdditionalanalyseselaborateuponanalysesotherwiseincludedintheEIRandsupporttheconclusionspreviouslyreported.

Therefore, themodifications to the EIR are not significant because the EIR is not changed in away thatdeprivesthepublicofameaningfulopportunitytocommentuponasubstantialadverseenvironmentaleffectof the Project. Based on the above, the clarifications to the EIRwould not result in any new significantimpactsorasubstantialincreaseintheseverityofanyimpactalreadyidentifiedintheEIR.Thus,noneoftheconditionsinSection15088.5oftheCEQAGuidelinesaremet,andrecirculationisnotrequired.

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCHNo.2013081022 4‐1

4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

A. INTRODUCTION

This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) has been prepared pursuant to PublicResourcesCodeSection21081.6,whichrequiresaLeadAgencytoadopta“reportingormonitoringprogramforchangestotheprojectorconditionsofprojectapproval,adoptedinordertomitigateoravoidsignificanteffectsontheenvironment.”Inaddition,Section15097(a)oftheStateCEQAGuidelinesrequiresthat:

Inorder toensure that themitigationmeasuresandprojectrevisions identified in theEIRornegativedeclarationareimplemented,thepublicagencyshalladoptaprogramformonitoringorreportingontherevisionswhichithasrequiredintheprojectandmeasuresithasimposedtomitigateoravoidsignificantenvironmentaleffects.Apublicagencymaydelegatereportingormonitoring responsibilities toanotherpublicagencyor toaprivate entitywhichaccepts thedelegation;however,untilmitigationmeasureshavebeencompletedthe leadagencyremainsresponsibleforensuringthatimplementationofthemitigationmeasuresoccursinaccordancewiththeprogram.

TheCityofLosAngelesistheLeadAgencyfortheProjectandthereforeisresponsibleforadministeringandimplementing the MMRP. Where appropriate, the Project’s Draft and Final EIRs identified mitigationmeasurestoavoidortomitigatepotential impacts identifiedtoa levelwherenosignificant impactontheenvironmentwouldoccur,or impactswouldbereduced to theextent feasible. ThisMMRP isdesigned tomonitorimplementationoftheProject’smitigationmeasuresaswellasitsprojectdesignfeatures.

Asshownonthefollowingpages,eachrequiredmitigationmeasureandproposedprojectdesignfeaturefortheProjectislistedandcategorizedbyimpactarea,withanaccompanyingidentificationofthefollowing:

EnforcementAgency:TheagencywiththepowertoenforcetheMitigationMeasure/ProjectDesignFeature.

MonitoringAgency:Theagencytowhichreportsinvolvingfeasibility,compliance,implementationanddevelopmentaremade.

MonitoringPhase: Thephaseof theProjectduringwhich theMitigationMeasure/ProjectDesignFeatureshallbemonitored.

Monitoring Frequency: The frequency at which the MitigationMeasure/Project Design Featureshallbemonitored.

Action Indicating Compliance: The action of which the Enforcement or Monitoring Agencyindicates that compliance with the requiredMitigationMeasure/Project Design Feature has beenimplemented.

The Project’s MMRP will be in place throughout all phases of the Project. The Project applicant will beresponsible for implementing allmitigationmeasures unless otherwise noted. The applicant shall also beobligated to provide a certification report to the appropriate monitoring agency and the appropriateenforcement agency that compliancewith the requiredmitigationmeasure or project design feature has

4.0 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program November 2015


beenimplemented.TheCity’sexistingplanning,engineering,review,andinspectionprocesseswillbeusedasthebasicfoundationfortheMMRPproceduresandwillalsoservetoprovidethedocumentationforthereportingprogram.

The certification report shall be submitted to the Project Planner at the Los Angeles Department of CityPlanning. Each report will be submitted to the Project Planner annually followingcompletion/implementation of the applicable mitigation measures and project design features and shallinclude sufficient information and documentation (such as building or demolition permits) to reasonablydeterminewhethertheintentofthemeasurehasbeensatisfied.TheCity,inconjunctionwiththeApplicant,shallassurethatProjectconstructionandoperationoccursinaccordancewiththeMMRP.

AfterreviewandapprovalofthefinalMMRPbytheCity,minorchangesandmodificationstotheMMRParepermitted,butcanonlybemadebytheApplicantsubjecttotheapprovalbytheCity.TheCity,inconjunctionwith any appropriate agencies or departments,will determine the adequacy of any proposed changes ormodification. The flexibility is necessary due to the nature of the MMRP, the need to protect theenvironmentinthemostefficientmanner,andtheneedtoreflectchangesinregulatoryconditions,suchasbutnotlimitedtochangestobuildingcoderequirements,updatestoLEED“Silver”standards,andchangesinSecretary of Interior Standards. No changeswill be permitted unless theMMRP continues to satisfy therequirementsofCEQA,asdeterminedbytheCity.

B. PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES, MITIGATION MEASURES AND IMPLEMENTATION

Aesthetics/Visual Resources

Project Design Features

NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforAesthetics/VisualResources

Mitigation Measures

NomitigationmeasuresarerequiredforAesthetics/VisualResources.

Air Quality


SeePDF‐GHG‐1andPDF‐GHG‐2,below.

Mitigation Measures

MM‐AQ‐1: The Applicant shall implement the following measures to reduce the emissions of airpollutants generatedbyheavy‐dutydiesel‐poweredequipmentoperatingat theProjectSite:

Themostcurrentgradeofultra‐lowsulfurdiesel(ULSD)fuelapprovedbyCARBandavailableintheSouthCoastAirBasinshallbeusedforallheavy‐dutydiesel‐poweredequipmentoperatingand/orrefuelingattheProjectSite

November 2015 4.0 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program


Truckandequipmentidlingandqueuingtimeshallbelimitedtofiveminutesorless,when equipment is not in active use, in accordancewith the CARB Airborne ToxicControlMeasure;

Theuse of the electricity infrastructure surrounding the construction sites shall beusedwherever available andpossible rather than electrical generatorspoweredbyinternalcombustionengines;

Utilizeconstructionequipmenthavingtheminimumpracticalenginesize(i.e.,lowestappropriatehorsepowerratingfortheintendedjob);

Allconstructionequipmentoperatingon‐siteshallbeproperlymaintained(includingengine tuning) at all times in accordance with manufacturers' specifications andschedules;

Tampering with construction equipment to increase horsepower or to defeatemissioncontroldevicesshallbeprohibited;

Theuseofallconstructionequipmentshallbesuspendedduringasecond‐stagesmogalertintheimmediatevicinityoftheProjectSite.

EnforcementAgency: SCAQMD;LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety

MonitoringAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety

MonitoringPhase: Construction

MonitoringFrequency: Periodicfieldinspectionsduringconstruction

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Field inspection sign‐off; Compliance certificationreportbyProjectcontractor

Cultural Resources

Archaelogical and Paleontological Resources


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforArchaelogicalandPaleontologicalResources

Mitigation Measures

MM‐ARCH‐1:TheApplicantshallretainaqualifiedarchaeologicalmonitorwhomeetstheSecretaryofthe Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for an archaeologist who shall bepresent during construction excavations such as grading, trenching, grubbing, or anyother construction excavation activity associated with the Project. The frequency ofmonitoring shall be determined by the archaeological monitor based on the rate ofexcavation and grading activities, proximity to known archaeological resources, thematerials being excavated (native versus fill soils), and the depth of excavation, and iffound, the abundance and type of archaeological resources encountered. Prior to theonsetofconstructionactivitiesanArchaeologicalResourceMitigationPlan(ARMP)shallbeprepared.TheARMPshallincludeprotocolsforimplementationoftheArchaeologicalMitigationMeasures;andshallalsorequireimplementationofapre‐constructiontestingprogramwithasamplingofsoiltestingatrepresentativetesttrenches.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofCityPlanning



MonitoringAgency: Los Angeles Department of City Planning; Los AngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety


MonitoringFrequency: Periodicperrecommendationsofarchaeologicalmonitor

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Compliance report by qualified archaeologicalmonitor.

MM‐ARCH‐2: In the event that archaeological resources are unearthed during ground‐disturbingactivities, the archaeological monitor shall be empowered to halt or redirect ground‐disturbingactivitiesawayfromthevicinityofthefindsothatthefindcanbeevaluated.Workshallbeallowedtocontinueoutsideof thevicinityof the find. Allarchaeologicalresources unearthed by Project construction activities shall be evaluated by thearchaeologist. The Applicant shall coordinate with the archaeologist and the City todevelop an appropriate treatment plan for the resources if they are determined to bepotentially eligible for the California Register or potentially qualify as uniquearchaeological resourcespursuant toCEQA. Treatmentmay include implementationofarchaeologicaldatarecoveryexcavationstoremovetheresourceorpreservationinplace.

EnforcementAgency: Los Angeles Department of City Planning; Los AngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety



MonitoringFrequency: Attimeofresourcediscovery,shoulditoccur

ActionIndicatingCompliance: If archaeological resources are unearthed, submittalof compliance certification report and treatment plan by aqualifiedarchaeologicalmonitor

MM‐ARCH‐3: The archaeological monitor shall prepare a final report at the conclusion ofarchaeologicalmonitoring.ThereportshallbesubmittedbytheApplicanttotheCity,theSouth Central Coastal Information Center, and representatives of other appropriate orconcerned agencies to signify the satisfactory completion of the Project and requiredmitigationmeasures. The report shall include a description of resources unearthed, ifany, treatment of the resources, and evaluation of the resources with respect to theCalifornia Register. The Applicant, in consultationwith the archaeologist and the Cityshall designate repositories meeting State standards in the event that archaeologicalmaterial is recovered. Project material shall be curated in accordance with the StateHistoricalResourcesCommission’sGuidelinesforCurationofArchaeologicalCollections.


MonitoringAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofCityPlanning

MonitoringPhase: Post‐construction

MonitoringFrequency: Onceuponcompletionofexcavation

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Compliance report by qualified archaeologicalmonitor.



MM‐ARCH‐4:IfhumanremainsareencounteredunexpectedlyduringimplementationoftheProject,StateHealth and Safety Code Section7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shalloccur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin anddisposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be ofNative American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native AmericanHeritageCommission(NAHC).TheNAHCshallthenidentifytheperson(s)thoughttobetheMostLikelyDescendent(MLD).TheMLDmay,withthepermissionoftheApplicant,inspect the site of the discovery of theNative American remains andmay recommendmeans for treating or disposing,with appropriate dignity, the human remains and anyassociated grave goods. The MLD shall complete their inspection and make theirrecommendationwithin48hoursofbeinggrantedaccessbytheApplicanttoinspectthediscovery. Therecommendationmay includethescientificremovalandnondestructiveanalysisofhumanremainsanditemsassociatedwithNativeAmericanburials.UponthediscoveryoftheNativeAmericanremains,theApplicantshallensurethattheimmediatevicinity,accordingtogenerallyacceptedculturalorarchaeologicalstandardsorpractices,wheretheNativeAmericanhumanremainsarelocated, isnotdamagedordisturbedbyfurther development activity until the Applicant has discussed and conferred, asprescribedinthismitigationmeasure,withtheMLDregardingtheirrecommendations,ifapplicable,takingintoaccountthepossibilityofmultiplehumanremains.TheApplicantshall discuss all reasonable options with the descendants regarding the descendants'preferencesfortreatment.

Whenever theNAHC isunable to identify aMLD, or theMLD identified fails tomake arecommendation, or the Applicant or his or her authorized representative rejects therecommendationofthedescendantsandthemediationprovidedforinSubdivision(k)ofPRCSection5097.94,ifinvoked,failstoprovidemeasuresacceptabletotheApplicant,theApplicant or his or her authorized representative shall inter the human remains anditemsassociatedwithNativeAmericanhumanremainswithappropriatedignityon thepropertyinalocationnotsubjecttofurtherandfuturesubsurfacedisturbance.




MonitoringFrequency: Ongoingthroughgradingandexcavation

ActionIndicatingCompliance: If human remains are encountered unexpectedly,submittalofwrittenevidence to theLosAngelesDepartmentof City Planning of compliance with State Health and SafetyCode Section 7050.0 and Public Resources Code Section5097.98

MM‐PALEO‐1: A qualified Paleontologist shall attend a pre‐grade meeting and develop apaleontological monitoring program for excavations into older Quaternary Alluviumdeposits. A qualified paleontologist is defined as a paleontologistmeeting the criteriaestablishedbytheSocietyforVertebratePaleontology.ThequalifiedPaleontologistshallsupervise a paleontological monitor who shall be present during constructionexcavationsintoolderQuaternaryAlluviumdeposits.Monitoringshallconsistofvisuallyinspecting fresh exposures of rock for larger fossil remains and, where appropriate,collectingwetordryscreenedsedimentsamplesofpromisinghorizonsforsmallerfossilremains. The frequency of monitoring inspections shall be determined by the



Paleontologist and shall be based on the rate of excavation and grading activities, thematerialsbeingexcavated,andthedepthofexcavation,andiffound,theabundanceandtypeoffossilsencountered.



MonitoringPhase: Pre‐Construction,Construction

MonitoringFrequency: Once prior to issuance of building permits for programapproval;Periodicduringexcavation

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Issuance of grading permit and development ofpaleontological resources monitoring program; Compliancereportbyqualifiedpaleontologist

MM‐PALEO‐2: If a potential fossil is found, the Paleontological Monitor shall be allowed totemporarilydivertorredirectgradingandexcavationactivitiesintheareaoftheexposedfossiltofacilitateevaluationand,ifnecessary,salvage.AtthePaleontologist’sdiscretionandtoreduceanyconstructiondelay,thegradingandexcavationcontractorshallassistinremovingrocksamplesforinitialprocessing.

EnforcementAgency: Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety; Los AngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety



MonitoringFrequency: Attimeofresourcediscovery,shoulditoccur

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Ifnounanticipateddiscoveriesarefoundandgradingoccurs within the older Quaternary Alluvium, compliancecertification report by qualified paleontologist; ifunanticipateddiscoveriesarefound,submittalofareportandmitigationplan(s)byaqualifiedpaleontologist.

MM‐PALEO‐3:Anyfossilsencounteredandrecoveredshallbepreparedtothepointofidentificationand catalogued before they are donated to their final repository. Any fossils collectedshall be donated to a public, non‐profit institution with a research interest in thematerials, such as the Natural HistoryMuseum of Los Angeles County. Accompanyingnotes,maps,andphotographsshallalsobefiledattherepository.


MonitoringAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofCityPlanning;


MonitoringFrequency: Attimeofresourcerecovery,shouldresourcesbediscovered

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Ifnounanticipateddiscoveriesarefoundandgradingoccurs within the older Quaternary Alluvium, compliancecertification report by qualified paleontologist; ifunanticipateddiscoveriesarefound,submittalofareportbyaqualifiedpaleontologist.



MM‐PALEO‐4: Following the completion of the abovemeasures, the Paleontologist shall prepare areportsummarizingtheresultsofthemonitoringandsalvagingefforts,themethodologyusedintheseefforts,aswellasadescriptionofthefossilscollectedandtheirsignificance.The report shall be submitted by the Project Applicant to the lead agency, theNaturalHistory Museum of Los Angeles County, and representatives of other appropriate orconcerned agencies to signify the satisfactory completion of the Project and requiredmitigationmeasures.




MonitoringFrequency: Onceuponthecompletionofexcavation

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Ifnounanticipateddiscoveriesarefoundandgradingoccurs within the older Quaternary Alluvium, compliancecertification report by qualified paleontologist; ifunanticipated discoveries are found, submittal of a by aqualifiedpaleontologist

Historical Resources


PDF‐HIST‐1:PalladiumPreservationandEnhancementPlan.TheApplicantshallcontributetothepreservationandenhancementofthePalladiumthroughimprovementstobeselectedatthe Applicant’s election, including from the following list of potential improvements,providedthattheproposedimprovementtobeimplementedmustbe(1)selectedbytheApplicantasapriority improvementandapprovedby its tenant for thePalladium, (2)approvedbytheDepartmentofCityPlanning’sOfficeofHistoricResources(“OHR”)and(3) in compliancewith the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, ascertified by a qualified historic preservation consultantwho shallmonitorwork underthePalladiumPreservationandEnhancementPlanforconformancewiththeStandards.

A. Timing. A draft Palladium Preservation and Enhancement Plan proposed by theApplicant shall be submitted to Hollywood Heritage and OHR no later than 30calendar days prior to any design review required from same and prior to theissuanceofbuildingpermitsfortheProject,andawhichwillincludeidentificationofcharacter‐defining featuresandthesignificanceofsuch features. A finalPlanshallbe approved by OHR prior to issuance of final certificates of occupancy for theProject.AttheApplicant’soption,earlierreviewbyOHRmayberequestedsuchasduring schematic design and design development. An Historic Structure ReportshallalsobepreparedinconjunctionwiththefinalPreservationandEnhancementPlan.

B. PotentialElements for Inclusion.The following includesa listofproposedpotentialimprovements to be considered for inclusionin the Palladium Preservation andEnhancementPlan.Thislistisbased,inpart,onsurveysofthePalladiumconductedby Historic Resources Group, which prepared the Project’s Historic ResourcesAssessment Report and conducted a prior historic review of the Palladium inconjunction with the Palladium’s 2008 rehabilitation. This list is also based onimprovementsrecommendedincommentlettersontheDraftEIR,aswellasneeded



functional improvements to thePalladium’soperations, toensurethat itremainsafirst‐class entertainment venue. Prior to construction of any improvements, theApplicant shall propose those improvements it determines to be priorityimprovementsandseektoobtaintheapprovalsreferencedinitems1,2and3ofthefirstparagraphabove.

– ImprovethePalladium’sexistingback‐stagespace,back‐of‐houseservice,andloadingoperations,whichdonotmeetcurrentperformanceandproductionneeds‐replacethe 2008 addition on the northern side of the Palladium, and potentially thepreviouslyaltered,originalextensioninthesamelocation,withsubterraneanand/oroverhead bridge connections to the new building on the north side. Additionally,relocate the existing outdoor truck loading area to a subterranean level; withsubterranean access from Argyle and Selma Avenues. These enhancements wouldprovide additional staging areas for the Palladium’s operations within the newbuilding; improve loading operations; eliminate any potential pedestrian‐vehicularconflictsonElCentroAvenue;andprovidesubstantiallymoreopenspaceontherearsideofthePalladiumforwalkingandgathering;

– Improve accessibility to, and utilization of, the Palladium’s existing southernstorefront spaces, better integrate the storefront spaceswith the proposedProject,and improve queuing – provide doors and potential window openings within thePalladium’swesternwalltoconnectpedestriansfromSunsetCourttothePalladium’sstorefronts;

– Prepare a design program for the Palladium’s existing southern storefront spaces.The nonstructural storefront partitions on the southern façade of the PalladiumbuildingwerealteredpriortothePalladium’s2008rehabilitationproject,andwerenotuniformorcharacter‐defining.The2008rehabilitation fundedbyCRAremovednon‐character‐defining features, reconstructed missing original features, and builtnew features such as storefronts that are compatible with the historic building.Similartotheintentandimplementationofthe2008rehabilitation,adesignprogramforthesestorefrontswouldwillincludeauniformsetofcomponentsthatprovidefora coherent design among the different storefront bays while allowing for layoutoptions that meet the needs of tenants, for instance allowing alterations of thelocationsandnumbersofdoors,windows,andmullions;

– Prepareahistoricallycompatiblesignageplan for thePalladium’sexistingsouthernstorefrontspaces,potentiallyincludingsuchelementsassigndimensionsandoptionsformaterials,construction,illumination,colors,andfinishes.Historicallytherehavebeen many different styles and types of tenant signage used on the building, andconsiderationwillbegiventohistoricsignagedesignprecedentsthataredocumentedin archival photographs of the Palladium when designing new signage for thestorefronts.Howeversignagemayormaynotbeneeded for theexistingstorefrontspaces;

– FlushopaqueentrancelobbydoorsonSunsetandArgyle‐Replacewithfullyglazeddoors that recall original design documented in the original Gordon Kaufmanndrawings;

– Ballroomceiling‐Repairandreplacetexturedacousticalplasterasneeded;

– Ballroomfloor‐Stripping,screening,varnishing,andwaxingona10yearcycle;



– Lobbyfinish,lighting,andrestoration‐Installcompatiblesconces,wallcovering,andcarpet;

– Public toilets – Remove and reinstall clean, durable multiple‐accommodationfacilities;

– Ballroomchandeliers‐Dustandwashglass;reducecorrosionandwaxmetalona10yearcycle;

– Woodroofframing‐Annualinspectionandlocaltreatmentbylicensedexterminator

– Metalflashings,fasciae,hardware‐Maintenanceoffinishesandoperatingpartsona10yearcycle;

– ExteriorWalls‐Maintenanceofpaintedsurfacesona10yearcycle;

– Neon and specialty signage and lighting ‐ Maintenance of ballasts, tubes, boxes,shields,facesona10yearcycle;

– HVACsystem‐Engineeringandreplacementofmajorcomponentsona15yearcycle;

– Roof‐Replacementona20yearcycle;

– Toilet fixtures, fittings,&accessories ‐Replacementofheavyuse toilet componentsona10yearcycle.

EnforcementAgency: Los Angeles Department of City Planning, Office of HistoricResources

MonitoringAgency: Los Angeles Department of City Planning, Office of HistoricResources

MonitoringPhase: PreConstruction,Construction,Operations

MonitoringFrequency: Submittal of draft Plan prior to issuance of buildingpermits;approval of final Plan by OHR prior to issuance of finalcertificates of occupancy; periodic thereafter based on Plandetails

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Approval of Plan by OHR; Compliance report byhistoricconsultant/monitor

PDF‐HIST‐2:HistoricInterpretiveExhibit.AnHistoricInterpretiveExhibitshallbeincorporatedintotheProjectatkeylocationstoincreasegeneralpublicandpatronawarenessandappreciationof the history and significance of Hollywood and the Hollywood Palladium. The exhibit shallprovide informativevisualdisplaysand/ormedia thatmayaddresssuch topicsas: thebuilding’sarchitectural style andarchitect; identificationofotherhistoricalbuildings in theProjectvicinityandtheirrelationshiptothePalladium;useoftheProjectSitepriortoconstructionofthePalladiumandthehistoricHollywoodcontext;andthelayersofhistoryatthesite:agriculture,motionpictureindustry,musicalrecording,liveentertainment,radio,andtelevision.Thedisplayshallbedesignedand implemented pursuant to input from Hollywood stakeholders. The Historic InterpretiveExhibitmaybelocatedwithinthePalladiumbuildingitself,orasanoutdoorinterpretiveprogramreviewedandapprovedbytheOfficeofHistoricResources. TheHistoricInterpretiveExhibitwillnotbehousedinseparatenewconstructionappendedtotheexteriorofthePalladiumbuilding.





MonitoringPhase: Construction,Operations

MonitoringFrequency: Onceduringconstruction for consistencywith thePDF;Onceduringoperations

ActionIndicatingCompliance: CompliancereportbyApplicant

Mitigation Measures

NomitigationmeasuresarerequiredforHistoricalResources.

Geology


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareProposedforGeology.

Mitigation Measures

MM‐GS‐1: Priorto issuanceofagradingpermit,aqualifiedgeotechnicalengineershallprepareandsubmittotheDepartmentofBuildingandSafetyafinalgeotechnicalreportthatprovidesrecommendations forseismicsafetyanddesignrequirements for foundations,retainingwalls/shoringandexcavationtomeetapplicableStateandCityregulatoryrequirements.AqualifiedgeotechnicalengineershallberetainedbytheApplicanttobepresentontheProjectSiteduringexcavation,grading,andgeneralsitepreparationactivitiestomonitorthe implementation of the recommendations specified in theGeology and SoilsReport,finalgeotechnicalreport,andanyothersubsequentGeologyandSoilsReportspreparedfortheProject,subjecttoCityreviewandapproval.Whenandifneeded,thegeotechnicalengineer shall provide structure‐specific geologic and geotechnical recommendationswhichshallbedocumented inareporttobeapprovedbytheCityandappendedtotheProject’spreviousGeologyandSoilsReports.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety


MonitoringPhase: Pre‐ConstructionandConstruction

MonitoringFrequency: Once, prior to issuance of grading permit; Periodic fieldinspectionsduringconstruction

Action IndicatingCompliance: Issuance of grading permits; Field inspection sign‐off;GeotechnicalEngineerssitevisitreportsasneeded

Greenhouse Gas Emissions


PDF‐GHG‐1: Construction Measures: The Project shall utilize off‐road diesel‐poweredconstructionequipmentthatmeetorexceedtheCARBandUSEPATier3Tier4off‐road



emissions standards for thoseequipment ratedat50hpor greaterduring the grading,concretepouringandbuildingconstructionphasesofProject construction.Polepower(electricitydeliveredfromtheutilitygrid)shallbetheprimarysourceofpowerforusewithon‐siteelectrictools,equipment,lighting,etc.,exceptwhere/wheninfeasibleduetositeconstraints;dieselgenerators,ifneeded,shallberatedbetween75horsepower(hp)and750hpandmeetorexceedapplicableTier4standards.Totaldieselgeneratorusageduring construction shall not exceed 312,000 horsepower‐hours. Cranes and concretepumpsshallbeelectrifiedwithpolepower.TheProjectshallutilizeon‐roadhaultrucksthatmeetorexceedthemodelyear2010emissionstandardsTheserequirementsshallbeincludedinapplicablebiddocumentsandsuccessfulcontractor(s)mustdemonstratetheabilitytosupplysuchequipment.Acopyofeachunit’scertifiedtierspecificationormodelyearspecificationandCARBorSCAQMDoperatingpermit(ifapplicable)shallbeavailableuponrequestatthetimeofmobilizationofeachapplicableunitofequipment.

EnforcementAgency: SCAQMD;LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety



MonitoringFrequency: Periodicfieldinspectionsduringconstruction

ActionIndicatingCompliance:Fieldinspectionsign‐off

PDF‐GHG‐2: GreenBuildingMeasures:TheProjectwouldbedesignedandoperatedtomeetorexceed the applicable requirements of the State of CaliforniaGreenBuilding StandardsCode and the City of Los Angeles Green Building Code andmeet the standards of theUnitedStatesGreenBuildingCouncil(USGBC)Leadership inEnergyandEnvironmentalDesign® (LEED®) Silver Certification level or its equivalent. Greenbuildingmeasureswouldincludebutarenotlimitedtothefollowing:

The Project would implement a construction waste management plan to recycleand/or salvage a minimum of 70 percent of nonhazardous construction debris orminimize the generation of construction waste to 2.5 pounds per square foot ofbuildingfloorarea.(LEED®MaterialsandResourcesCredit5[v4]);

Treesandotherlandscaping(approximately53,600squarefeetor35percentoftheSitearea)wouldprovideshadingandcapturecarbondioxideemissions;

Roof‐top Terraces would include approximately 37,300 square feet of landscapedarea. The remaining roof‐top areaswoulduse high‐albedo/reflective roofs such aslight‐colored,build‐up“white”roofstoreduceenergyloadsandtheurbanheat‐islandeffect;

TheProjectwouldbedesignedtooptimizeenergyperformanceandreducebuildingenergy cost by 10 percent for new construction compared to the Title 24 BuildingStandardsCode.(LEED®EnergyandAtmosphereCredit2[v4]);

TheProjectwouldbedesignedtooptimizeenergyperformanceandreducebuildingenergy cost by installing energy efficient appliances thatmeet the USEPA ENERGYSTARratingstandardsorequivalent;

TheProjectwould includedouble‐panedwindows tokeepheatoutduring summermonthsandkeepheatinsideduringwintermonths;

TheProjectwouldincludelightingcontrolswithoccupancysensorstotakeadvantageofavailablenaturallight;



Theparkingstructurewouldbedesignedwithoccupancy‐sensorcontrolled lightingthat would place lighting fixtures in a low power state in unoccupied zones. AdemonstrationprojectbytheUnitedStatesDepartmentofEnergyindicatedthattheuse of occupancy‐sensor controlled lighting achieved a reduction of 50 percent ormoreinlightingenergyusecomparedtoasimilarlylightedparkingstructurewithoutoccupancy‐sensorcontrols.Forthepurposesofthisassessment,compliancewiththisfeatureisassumedtoachieveaminimum50percentreductionintheenergyrequiredforparkingstructurelighting;

The Project would reduce overall potable water use by a minimum of 30 percentcompared to baseline water consumption as defined by LEED® Water EfficiencyPrerequisite 2 [v4] by installing water fixtures that exceed applicable standards,weather‐based irrigation controllers, drip/subsurface irrigation, use of droughttolerant/Californianativeplants,andcollectionofstormwaterforuseinlandscaping.(LEED®WaterEfficiencyCredit2[v4]);

TheProjectwouldprovideon‐siterecyclingareas,consistentwithCityofLosAngelesstrategiesandordinances,with thegoalofachieving70percentwastediversionby2020,and90percentby2025;

The Project would utilize low VOC paint during building construction for allresidentialandnon‐residentialinteriorcoating;



MonitoringPhase: Pre‐construction;Operation

MonitoringFrequency: Onceatplancheckpriorto issuanceofbuildingpermit;Onceafteroperation

Action Indicating Compliance: Issuance of Building Permit (Pre‐construction);Compliancecertificationreport(Operation)

Mitigation Measures

NoMitigationMeasuresarerequiredforGreenhouseGasEmissions.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforHazardsandHazardousMaterials.

Mitigation Measures

MM‐HAZ‐1: Priortoissuanceofabuildingpermit,theApplicantshallinvestigatethepurposeoftheon‐sitegroundwatermonitoringwellstodeterminewhethertheyarestillnecessary.Ifitisdeterminedthatthewellsarenotassociatedwithanyongoinginvestigation,theyshallbe properly abandoned in accordance with applicable regulations and guidelines. In



addition,theUSTsshallberemovedpursuanttothepreviousLAFDreviewandclosureletter.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety;LAFD;RWQCB

MonitoringAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety: LAFD

MonitoringPhase: Pre‐construction;Construction

MonitoringFrequency: Onceatonsetofbuildingactivities

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Compliancereport

MM‐HAZ‐2:PriortoenhancementactivitiesinvolvinganyalterationstothePalladiuminareaswhereasbestoscouldbefound,theApplicantshallsubmitverificationtotheCityofLosAngelesDepartment of Building and Safety that an asbestos survey for the proposed area ofalteration has been conducted. If asbestos is found, the Applicant shall follow allproceduralrequirementsandregulationsoftheSCAQMDRule1403.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety;SCAQMD


MonitoringPhase: Pre‐Construction;Constructionifasbestosiffound

MonitoringFrequency: Onceprior toPalladiumbuildingalterations;on‐goingduringalterationsifasbestosisfound

ActionIndicatingCompliance: CompliancereportbyProjectcontractor

MM‐HAZ‐3: PriortoenhancementactivitiesinvolvinganyalterationstothePalladium,theApplicantshallsubmitverificationtotheCityofLosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafetythatalead‐basedpaintsurveyfortheproposedareaofalterationhasbeenconducted.Iflead‐based paint is found for the proposed area of alteration, the Applicant shall follow allproceduralrequirementsandregulationsforitsproperremovalanddisposal.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofPublicWorks;CalEPA

MonitoringAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofPublicWorks

MonitoringPhase: Pre‐construction; Constructionifleadbasedpaintispresent

MonitoringFrequency: Onceprior toPalladiumbuildingalterations;on‐goingduringalterationsiflead‐basedpaintisfound


MM‐HAZ‐4:Fluorescentlightballastandotherproductlabelsforexistingbuildingfeaturesthatmightbe altered during restoration activities for the Palladium shall be inspected prior todemolition.Ifthelabelsdonotincludethestatement“NoPCBs”,theproduct(s)shallbeproperly removed by a licensed PCB removal contractor and disposed of as PCB‐containingwastepriortodemolition.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety;CalEPA



MonitoringFrequency: Periodicfieldinspectionsduringalterationactivities




Hydrology and Water Quality


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforHydrologyandWaterQuality.

Mitigation Measures

NomitigationmeasuresarerequiredforHydrologyandWaterQuality.

Land Use and Planning


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforLandUseandPlanning.

PDF‐Land Use‐1: Prior to the issuance of a building permit for above grade construction for theProject,theApplicantshalleither(1)recordacovenanttotietheProjectSite’stwolots;or (2)recordaphaseofanapproved tractmap for theProjectwhichmerges theSite’stwolotsintoonemastergroundlot.



MonitoringPhase: PreConstruction

MonitoringFrequency: Onepriortoissuanceofabuildingpermit

ActionIndicatingCompliance:Reviewandsign‐offbytheDepartmentofCityPlanning.

Mitigation Measures

NoMitigationMeasuresarerequiredforLandUseandplanning.

Noise


PDF‐NOISE‐1:EquipmentControl:TheProjectcontractor(s)shallequipallconstructionequipment,fixedormobile,withproperlyoperatingandmaintainednoisemufflers,consistentwithmanufacturers’standards.




MonitoringFrequency: PeriodicFieldInspections

ActionIndicatingCompliance:FieldInspectionSign‐offwithincompliancereport



PDF‐NOISE‐2: Vibration Control: As a precaution to avoid or minimize potential constructionvibration damage, monitoring shall occur during excavation activities and duringplacement of foundation structures within 20 feet of the original Palladium building.Construction activitieswithin this area shall utilize lower vibratory equipment optionswhentheyareavailable.Intheeventdamageoccurs,themonitorshallbeauthorizedtohaltconstructionactivitiesuntilsuchactivitiesareadjustedtoavoidorminimizedamagetotheBuilding.




MonitoringFrequency: Daily observation during excavation/foundationworkwithin20feetoftheoriginalPalladiumbuilding

ActionIndicatingCompliance:FieldInspectionSign‐offwithincompliancereport

PDF‐NOISE‐3: Control of Amplified Sound: The sound levels of amplified sound equipment inground level open space areas shall be adjusted during Project operations to avoidexceedingthefollowinglimitsattheProjectpropertylines: ForthepropertylinealongArgyleAvenue–66dBA;forthepropertylinealongSunsetBoulevard–71dBA;fortheproperty line along El CentroAvenue – 66 dBA; and for the property line along SelmaAvenueProperties–62dBA.



MonitoringPhase: Operations

MonitoringFrequency: AnnuallyforfirstthreeyearsofProjectoperations

ActionIndicatingCompliance:Fieldinspectionreport

Mitigation Measures

MM‐NOISE‐1:Temporaryconstructionnoisebarriersshallbeimplementedasfollows:

TheProjectshallensuretheprovisionofa5dBAnoisebarrierbetweentheProjectconstruction and the existing residential development on the northwest corner ofSelma Avenue and Argyle Avenue (existing buildings between the residentialdevelopmentandtheProjectatthetimeofconstructionmaycontributetothesoundattenuation).;andan8dBA,16foothighnoisebarrierbetweentheProjectandtheLeBonHotel(allowingforagatethatmaybeopenedfromtimetotimeforSiteentry).

IfthefollowingrelatedprojectsadjacenttotheProjectSite(i.e.atColumbiaSquare,theSelmaandVineproject,theBLVD6200projectsouthofHollywoodBoulevard,or6250 Sunset project) are occupied by new residents at the time of Projectconstruction, then temporary noise barriers shall be provided between the Projectconstruction and those occupied units. Based on the exceedance of the thresholdsnoted in the above analysis (given the distance from the Project Site and existingsoundlevelsattherespectivelocations),thebarriersshallprovideasoundreductionof5dBAbetweentheProjectSiteandthe6250Sunsetproject,andapproximately10dBAbetweentheProjectandtheremainingfutureprojects.






MonitoringFrequency: Periodicfieldinspections

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Field inspection sign‐off; Compliance certificationreportsubmittedbyProjectcontractor

MM‐NOISE‐2:Engineidlingfromconstructionequipmentsuchasbulldozersandhaultrucksshallbelimited,totheextentfeasible.






Population, Housing and Employment


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforPopulation,HousingandEmployment.

Mitigation Measures

NomitigationmeasuresarerequiredforPopulation,HousingandEmployment.

Public Services‐

Fire Protection


PDF‐FIRE‐1:FireandEmergencyServiceProvisions:ThefollowingVoluntaryFireandEmergencyMedicalMeasuresshallbeprovidedforthelongtermoperationsoftheProject.

OwnersuppliedAED’s(defibrillators)onselectedfloorstobeusedbyon‐sitesecurityasnecessary. SecuritypersonneltobefullytrainedontheuseandoperationoftheAED’s;

TrainingontheAED’sfortenantfloorwardensandothers;tenantstobeencouragedtopurchasetheirownAED’s;

CERT/firstaidtrainingforallfloorwardensandothers;

CERT/firstaidtrainingmadeavailableandencouragedforallbuildingoccupants,ifitcanbeaccessedon‐line;



JointtrainingsforLAFDpersonnelandbuildingpersonnelsite

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesFireDepartment

MonitoringAgency: LosAngelesFireDepartment




Mitigation Measures

MM‐FIRE‐1:Priortotheissuanceofabuildingpermit,theApplicantshallhaveadditionalconsultationwiththeLAFDandshallincorporateallfirepreventionandsuppressionfeaturesdeemedappropriatebyLAFDtothefinaldesignoftheProject.


MonitoringAgency: Los Angeles Fire Department; Los Angeles Department ofBuildingandSafety

MonitoringPhase: Pre‐construction

MonitoringFrequency: Once,priortoissuanceofabuildingpermit

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Approval of the plot plan by the Los Angeles FireDepartmentandDepartmentofBuildingandSafety

MM‐FIRE‐2: Priortothe issuanceofbuildingpermits,Projectbuildingplans includingaplotplanandfloorplanofthebuildingsshallbesubmittedforapprovalbytheLAFDforreviewofall regulatory measures. The plot plan shall include the following minimum designfeatures: locationandgradeofaccessroadsandfirelanes,roadwaywidths,distanceofbuildingsfromanedgeofaroadwayofanimprovedstreet,accessroad,ordesignatedfirelane,turningareas,andfirehydrants.


MonitoringAgency: Los Angeles Fire Department; Los Angeles Department ofBuildingandSafety


MonitoringFrequency: Once,priortoissuanceofabuildingpermit

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Approval of the plot plan by the Los Angeles FireDepartmentandDepartmentofBuildingandSafety

Police Protection


PDF‐POL‐1: ProjectSecurityFeatures:TheProject'ssecurityshallinclude,butnotbelimitedto,thefollowingdesignfeatures:

Installingandutilizinganextensivesecuritycameranetwork,withapproximately40‐50 cameras throughout the underground and above‐grade parking structure; the



elevators; the common and amenity spaces; the lobby areas; and the rooftop andgroundleveloutdooropenspaces.

Maintaining all security camera footage for at least 30 days, and providing suchfootagetoLAPDasneeded.

Maintainingapproximately30‐40staffonsite, includingatthelobbyconciergedeskandwithinthecarvaletareas.DesignatedstafferswillbededicatedtomonitoringtheProject's security cameras and directing staff to locations where any suspiciousactivityisviewed.

Requiringbackgroundchecksofallresidents,bothpriortoenteringintoanewleaseattheProject,andpriortorenewalofthatlease.

Controlling access to all building elevators, residences, and resident‐only commonareasthroughanelectronickeyfobspecifictoeachuser.

TrainingstaffonsoundsecuritypoliciesfortheProject'sbuildings.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesPoliceDepartment

MonitoringAgency: LosAngelesPoliceDepartment




PDF‐POL‐2: Site Uses: No nightclub shall be included in the Project, except that the HollywoodPalladiumispermittedtocontinueitscurrentoperationsasaneventandconcertvenue.




MonitoringFrequency: OnceatProjectapproval

ActionIndicatingCompliance:Certificateofoccupancy

Mitigation Measures

MM‐POL‐1: Prior to theoccupancyof theProject, theApplicant shall provide theHollywoodAreaCommanding Officer with a diagram of each portion of the property, including accessroutes,andadditionalinformationtofacilitatepotentialLAPDresponses.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesPoliceDepartment

MonitoringAgency: Los Angeles Police Department; Los Angeles Department ofbuildingandSafety


MonitoringFrequency: Once,priortocertificateofoccupancy

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Sign‐off on LAPD reviewed diagrams; Certificate ofoccupancy



Schools


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforschools.

Mitigation Measures

MM‐ SCH‐1: The Project shall pay required school mitigation fees pursuant to Government CodeSection65995andincompliancewithSB50(paymentofdeveloperfees).

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety;LAUSD

MonitoringAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety;LAUSD

MonitoringPhase: Pre‐Construction

MonitoringFrequency: OnceatPlanCheck

ActionIndicatingCompliance: ReceiptofpaymentfromLAUSD

Libraries


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforlibraries.

Mitigation Measures

NoMitigationMeasuresarerequiredforLibraries.

Parks and Recreation


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforParksandRecreation.

Mitigation Measures

MM‐PRK‐1: In the event that the Project’s amenities do not provide sufficient credit against theProject’s land dedication and/or in lieu fee requirement, the Project applicant shall dooneormoreofthefollowing:(1)dedicateadditionalparklandtomeettherequirementsofLAMCSection17.12;(2)payin‐lieufeesforanylanddedicationrequirementshortfall;or(3)provideon‐siteimprovementsequivalentinvaluetosaidin‐lieufees.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofRecreationandParks;LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety

MonitoringAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofRecreationandParks;LosAngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety

MonitoringPhase: Pre‐operations

MonitoringFrequency: Oncepriortocertificationofoccupancy

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Certificateofoccupancy



Transportation and Circulation


PDF‐TRAF‐1: A reciprocal easement agreement, or similar legalmechanism, shall be executed andrecorded prior to issuance of final certificates of occupancy for the Project providingaccessforthePalladiumlotlocatedat6221SunsetBoulevardacrosstheadjacentlot(s).

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofCityPlanning;


MonitoringPhase: Pre‐Construction

MonitoringFrequency: Once,priortoissuanceofcertificateofoccupancy

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Completionofagreementperreviewforcertificateofoccupancy

Mitigation Measures

MM‐TRAF‐1: Off‐site truck staging shall be provided in a legal area furnished by the constructiontruckcontractor. TrucksmayuseaccesspointsalongSelmaAvenue,ElCentroAvenue,ArgyleAvenueandSunsetBoulevardasneeded.Trucksshallnotbepermittedtotravelalonglocalresidentialstreets.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofTransportation;

MonitoringAgency: Los Angeles Department of Transportation; Los AngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety



ActionIndicatingCompliance: Fieldinspectionsign‐offandcompliancecertificationreportsubmittedbyprojectcontractor

MM‐TRAF‐2: A flagmanshallbeplacedat the truckentryandexit fromtheProjectsiteontoSelmaAvenuetocontroltheflowofexitingtrucks.





ActionIndicatingCompliance: Field inspection sign‐off; Compliance certificationreportsubmittedbyprojectcontractor

MM‐TRAF‐3: Deliveries andpick‐upsof constructionmaterials shall be scheduledduringnon‐peaktravelperiodsandcoordinatedtoreducethepotentialoftruckswaitingtoloadorunloadforprotractedperiodsoftime.








MM‐TRAF‐4: Accessshallremainunobstructed for landuses inproximity to theProjectsiteduringProjectconstruction.






MM‐TRAF‐5: Permanent lane or sidewalk closures are not anticipated for the Project long‐termoperations.Temporarylaneorsidewalkclosures,whenneededforconstruction,shallbescheduledtoavoidpeakcommutehoursandpeakschooldrop‐offandpick‐uphourstotheextentpossible.Intheeventoffull‐timelaneorsidewalkclosuresforconstruction,aworksitetrafficcontrolplan,approvedbytheCityofLosAngeles,shallbeimplementedtosafelyroutetrafficorpedestriansaroundanysuchlaneorsidewalkclosures.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofPublicWorks

MonitoringAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofPublicWorks


MonitoringFrequency: Once at time needed for closure is identified; Periodic fieldinspectionsduringclosure


MM‐TRAF‐6:AConstructionManagementPlanshallbedevelopedbythecontractorandapprovedbythe City of Los Angeles. In addition to the measures identified above, a ConstructionManagementPlanshallincludethefollowing:

Identifythelocationsoftheoff‐sitetruckstaginganddetailmeasurestoensurethattrucks use the specified haul route, and do not travel through nearby residentialneighborhoods.

Schedulevehiclemovementstoensurethattherearenovehicleswaitingoff‐siteandimpedingpublictrafficflowonthesurroundingstreets.

Establishrequirementsforloading/unloadingandstorageofmaterialsontheProjectsite.



Establishrequirementsforthetemporaryremovalofparkingspaces,timelimitsforthereductionoftravellanesandclosingordiversionofpedestrianfacilitiestoensurethesafetyofpedestrianandaccesstolocalbusinesses.

CoordinatewiththeCityandemergencyserviceproviderstoensureadequateaccessismaintainedtotheProjectsiteandneighboringbusinesses.

During construction activities when construction worker parking cannot beaccommodated on the Project site, a Construction Worker Parking Plan shall bepreparedwhichidentifiesalternateparkinglocation(s)forconstructionworkersandthemethodoftransportationtoandfromtheProjectsite(ifbeyondwalkingdistance)for approval by the City. The Construction Worker Parking Plan shall prohibitconstruction worker parking on residential streets and prohibit on‐street parking,exceptasapprovedbytheCity.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofTransportation

MonitoringAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofTransportation


MonitoringFrequency: Once prior to issuance of Building Permit; Periodic fieldinspectionsduringconstruction

ActionIndicatingCompliancewithMitigationFeature: Approval of ConstructionTrafficManagementPlanfromtheLosAngelesDepartmentofTransportation prior to issuance of Building Permit (Pre‐construction); compliance certification report submitted byProjectcontractor(Construction)

MM‐TRAF‐7: TheProjectshallimplementthefollowingphysicalroadwayimprovementsthatcanbeprovidedwithinexistingroadwaywidthswithoutrequiringremovalofparkingspaces:

Intersection2,CahuengaBoulevard&FranklinAvenue.Modifythesignalequipmentandoperationtoallowasouthboundprotectedleft‐turnmovementwithawestboundright‐turn overlap. This improvement will require the southbound U‐turns at theintersectiontoberestricted.

Intersection 23, Gower Street & Franklin Avenue. Coordinate with the ColumbiaSquareprojectandLADOTtoarrangeforapotentialfairsharecontributiontowardstheimplementationofanimprovementproposedbytheColumbiaSquareprojectthatwould upgrade the traffic signal equipment to allow for northbound right‐turnoverlap.

EnforcementAgency: Los Angeles Department of Transportation; Department ofPublicWorks

MonitoringAgency: Los Angeles Department of Transportation; Department ofPublicWorks


MonitoringFrequency: Onceatplanapproval;on‐goingduringconstruction

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Sign‐off on road construction plans; Sign‐off oncompletedconstructionwork



MM‐TRAF‐87:TheProjectshallupgradetrafficsignalcontrollersfromaType170toaType2070atthefollowingsevenintersectionswithintheProjectstudyarea:

YuccaStreetandWilcoxAvenue.

SelmaAvenueandWilcoxAvenue

DeLongpreAvenueandWilcoxAvenue

ColeAvenueandFountainAvenue

CahuengaAvenueandFountainAvenue

ElCentroAvenueandFountainAvenue

FountainAvenueandGowerStreet

EnforcementAgency: Los Angeles Department of Transportation; Department ofPublicWorks

MonitoringAgency: Los Angeles Department of Transportation; Department ofPublicWorks


MonitoringFrequency: Onceatplanapproval;on‐goingduringconstruction

ActionIndicatingCompliance: Sign‐off on road construction plans; Sign‐off oncompletedconstructionwork

MM‐TRAF‐98:TheProjectshallimplementatraveldemandmanagement(TDM)program,consistentwith the recommendations of LADOT. The exactmeasures to be implementedwill bedeterminedwhentheplanisprepared,priortoissuanceofafinalcertificateofoccupancyfor the Project. The TDM program shall ensure appropriate implementation of theProject’s sidewalks/plazas, street trees/landscaping, street and pedestrian amenities,lightingandbicycleprovisionstoencouragealternativemodesoftransportation.Itshallalsoincludeotherfeaturesasappropriate,suchas,forexample,unbundledparking,(i.e.separatingthecostofpurchasingorrentingparkingspacesfromthecostofpurchasingorrentingadwellingunit);rideshareprograms,(whichcouldincludetheprovisionofanon‐sitetransitandrideshareinformationcenterthatprovidesassistancetohelppeopleformcarpools or access transit alternatives, and/or priority parking for carpools); and/or atransit pass discount program, (that typically includes negotiating with transit serviceproviderstopurchasetransitpassesinbulkatadiscountedratewithresaletointerestedresidents or employees at discounted prices), identification of an on‐site TDMcoordinator, making information available to residents and employees regardingalternativetransportationoptions,monitoringandsurveyingrequirements,aguaranteedride home program, participation in the LADOT Mobility Hubs program (which couldinclude secure bike parking, bike‐share kiosks, car‐share parking spaces and services,and/or electric scooter‐share), contributing a one‐time fixed‐fee of $100,000 to bedeposited into theCity’sBicycleTrust fund to implementbicycle improvementswithinthe area of the Project, and/or participation in the Hollywood TransportationManagementOrganization(TMO)tobecreatedbyothermajoremployersinHollywoodwithinthenextfewyears.TheProjectisalsoprovidingamplebicycleparkingandon‐sitebicyclerepairfacilitiesincompliancewithLosAngelesCityMunicipalCoderequirements.

EnforcementAgency: LosAngelesDepartmentofTransportation



MonitoringAgency: Los Angeles Department of Transportation; Los AngelesDepartmentofPublicWorks

MonitoringPhase: Pre‐Operation;Operation

MonitoringFrequency: Once prior to issuance of a final certificate of occupancy;Annuallyduringfirstthreeyearsofoperations

ActionIndicatingCompliance: LADOT approval of Traffic TDM program; Annualconsistencyreview

MM‐TRAF‐10: The Project shall fund and coordinate implementation of a Traffic Calming Plan toreduceProjectimpactsonElCentroAvenuebetweenSantaMonicaBoulevardandSunsetAvenue. The Plan shall be approved by LADOT and include community consultationcoordinated through the Council Office on the final selection of calming measuresincluded. It shall include such physical measures as changes in street alignment,installation of barriers, speed humps, speed tables, raised crosswalks, chicanes, andchokers, and/or operational measures such as turn restrictions, speed limits, andinstallationofstopsigns.

EnforcementAgency: Los Angeles Department of Transportation; Los AngelesDepartmentofPublicWorks

MonitoringAgency: Los Angeles Department of Transportation; Los AngelesDepartmentofPublicWorks

MonitoringPhase: Constructionandoperations

MonitoringFrequency: Once for plan approval; Periodic during construction ofcalmingmeasures

ActionIndicatingCompliance: LADOTapprovalofTrafficCalmingPlan;ComplianceapprovalbyLADOT

Utilites and Service Systesm

Water Supply


PDF‐WS‐1,WaterConservationFeatures: The Project shall provide a reduction in overall use ofpotablewaterby30percent,fromthatallowedundertheCaliforniaBuildingCode(CBC)perCityOrdinanceNo.181,480. Further, it shall include towardsmeeting thisend thefollowingwatersavingfeatures:

Showerheads–nomorethanoneshowerheadperstallatcommonresidential,hotel,fitnessandcommercialuses;

HighEfficiencyClothesWashers(Commercial/Residential);

IndividualMeteringorSubmeteringforwateruseatseparatecommercialuses;

Water‐SavingPoolFilter;

LeakDetectionSystemforswimmingpoolandJacuzzi;

Cooling Tower Conductivity Controllers or Cooling Tower pH ConductivityControllers;



WeatherBasedIrrigationController;

DroughtTolerantPlants(asfeasibleatlandscaping);

California native plants ‐ minimum 30% of total landscaping at ground levelcourtyards;

Drip/subsurfaceirrigation(micro‐irrigation);

Hydro‐zoning(groupplantswithsimilarwaterrequirements);

Zonedirrigation;

Separatemeteringorsubmeteringforexteriorlandscapingwateruse;

Buildingcommissioningtoensuresystemsareoperatingasdesigned;

WeatherBasedIrrigationController;

RainwaterHarvesting;and

LandscapingContouringtominimizeprecipitationrunoff.


MonitoringAgency: Los Angeles Department of City Planning (approval ofmeasures and performance standards); Los AngelesDepartmentofBuildingandSafety(Operation)

MonitoringPhase: Construction;Operation

MonitoringFrequency: Once prior to issuance of final certificate of occupancy;Annuallyduringfirstthreeyearsofoperation

Action Indicating Compliance: Issuance of final certificate of occupancy; Annualcompliancecertificationreport(Operation)

Mitigation Measures

NoMitigationMeasuresarerequiredforWaterSupply.

Wastewater


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforWastewater.

Mitigation Measures

NoMitigationMeasuresarerequiredforWastewater

Solid Waste


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforSolidWaste.



Mitigation Measures

NoMitigationMeasuresarerequiredforSolidWaste.

Electricity Service


PDF‐ELEC‐1: Green BuildingMeasures: The Project shall be designed and operated to meet orexceed the applicable requirements of the State of CaliforniaGreenBuilding StandardsCode and the City of Los Angeles Green Building Code andmeet the standards of theUSGBCLEED®SilverCertificationleveloritsequivalent.Greenbuildingmeasureswouldinclude,butarenotlimitedtothefollowing:

Overall building efficiencywould exceed Title 24 (2013) Building Envelope EnergyEfficiencyStandardsby10percent;

Useofglass/windowareasforventilationanddaylightaccessibility;

Landscapingofroofdecks;

Roof top areas would be energy efficient, including landscaped terraces at somelocations,with theremainingroof‐topareasusinghigh‐albedo/reflective roofssuchas light‐colored, build‐up “white” roofs to reduce energy loads and enhance airquality;

Treesandother landscaping(approximately53,600sq.ft. , inclusiveof thepoolandrooftop terraces,or35percentof theSitearea,wouldprovideshadingandcapturecarbondioxideemissions;

Installationofenergy‐efficientappliances(EnergyStar™);

Glass/windowareasforventilationanddaylightaccessibility;

Double‐panedwindowstokeepheatoutduringsummermonthsandkeepheatinsideduringwintermonths;

Lightingcontrolswithoccupancysensorstotakeadvantageofavailablenaturallight;and

Elevator TV monitors with programming that would provide residents real‐timeupdatesonenergyusageinthebuildingandtipsonhowtheycanconserveenergy.

Occupancy‐sensorcontrolledlightingintheparkingstructure.



MonitoringPhase: Pre‐construction;Operation

MonitoringFrequency: Annuallyduringfirstthreeyearsofoperation

ActionIndicatingCompliance:Annualcompliancecertificationreport(Operation)



Mitigation Measures

NoMitigationMeasuresarerequiredforElectricityServices

Natural Gas


NoProjectDesignFeaturesareproposedforNaturalGas.

Mitigation Measures

NoMitigationMeasuresarerequiredforNaturalGas.

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCHNo.2013081022

APPENDICES

ListofAppendices

AppendixA:HistoricResourcesCorrespondence

A‐1.CorrespondencefromtheCaliforniaOfficeofHistoricPreservationandCEQACaseStudy

AppendixB:AirQualitySupplementaryAnalyses,UpdatetoDraftEIRAppendixB

B‐1. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), Quantifying Greenhouse GasMitigationMeasures(SelectedPages)

B‐2.HealthRiskAssessmentReport

B‐3.DispersionModelingforLocalizedSignificanceThresholds

AppendixC:NoiseAddendum,UpdatetoDraftEIRAppendixH

C‐1.CalculationSheetforConstructionNoiseattheLeBonHotel

C‐2.CorrectedversionofAppendixH‐1.3.

C‐3.AdditionalinputdataforTrafficNoiseanalysisinDraftEIRAppendixH‐1.5

AppendixD:DesignatedLocalAuthorityCorrespondence

D‐1. PalladiumResidences: Request to Initiate an Owner Participation Agreement to Allow For aDevelopmentGreaterThan4.5:1intheHollywoodRedevelopmentProjectArea

D‐2. Letter from CRA/LA regarding Floor Area Ratio – Regional Center Commercial DesignationHollywoodRedevelopmentProjectArea

appendices November 2015

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCHNo.2013081022


Appendix A: Historic Resources Correspondence

A‐1. Correspondence from the California Office of Historic Preservation and CEQA Case Study

From: deCourcy, Sean@Parks [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 12:27 PM To: Bryan Fahrbach <[email protected]> Cc: Paul Travis <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Palladium Residences Letter Bryan, I wanted to let you know, we used the Palladium project environmental process as one of our recent CEQA Casestudy articles. While we don’t call out the project by name, we appreciated the way the Lead Agency incorporated OHP’s comments into the final environmental document and wanted to share this example with other Lead Agencies. Sincerely, Sean de Courcy State Historian II Local Government & Environmental Compliance Unit California Office of Historic Preservation (916) 445-7042 (916) 445-7053 fax [email protected] From: deCourcy, Sean@Parks Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 10:31 AM To: 'Bryan Fahrbach' Cc: Paul Travis Subject: RE: Palladium Residences Letter Bryan, Thank you very much for considering our comments as part of the environmental review process for the Palladium Project. Sean de Courcy State Historian II Local Government & Environmental Compliance Unit California Office of Historic Preservation (916) 445-7042 (916) 445-7053 fax [email protected] From: Bryan Fahrbach [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 11:48 AM To: deCourcy, Sean@Parks Cc: Paul Travis Subject: Palladium Residences Letter Dear Mr. deCourcy,

Attached please find a letter regarding the Palladium Residences Project Draft EIR. A hard copy is being sent to you by mail. Best regards, Bryan Fahrbach

Infill development is generally considered good land

use planning. Dense walkable communities with a vari-ety of housing options encourage people to live closer to their jobs, which can reduce their vehicle miles trav-eled. Urban infill can lower overall energy consump-tion for a city. When done effectively, infill develop-ment can help build stronger, more stable communities. Historic resources should be considered and incorpo-rated into infill development planning for the health and benefit of the community. In this CEQA Case Study, an applicant proposed to build two 28-story residential towers and a 3-level park-ing garage adjacent to a single story historic commercial building in southern California. The neighborhood traditionally consisted of low-rise commercial buildings, but the community’s General Plan identified the area as a future high-density, mixed-use zone. The applicant proposed to mitigate any impacts to the historic build-ing’s integrity by restoring a few finishes in the build-ing’s lobby. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the proposed project found the towers would have no impact on the historic building’s integri-ty. Historic integrity is defined by National Register Bulle-tin: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evalua-tion, as containing seven aspects: location, design, set-ting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The environmental document did not focus on impacts to the historic building’s integrity of setting (physical environment) and feeling (sense of a particular period of time). If significant impacts to elements of a build-ing’s historic integrity result from infill development, it is important to acknowledge the impacts and work with the applicant to ensure as much of the building’s histor-ic integrity is preserved as possible. After receiving comments to this effect, the Final EIR

included a historic rehabilitation treatment plan as mitiga-tion for impacts to other elements of the building’s historic integrity. The project proponent agreed that the complete restoration would comply with the Secretary of the Interi-or’s Standards for Rehabilitation and they would work with a restoration architect to ensure any unforeseen conditions were approached thoughtfully. The Final EIR maintained that the impact to the historic building was therefore less than significant because the final proposal ensured five as-pects of the building’s historic integrity would remain intact despite some impact to the buildings historic setting and feeling. Given the project objectives of 1) increased density and 2) preservation/continued use of the historic building, this approach seems like reasonable means for ensuring impacts to the building are less than significant. Local government planners and preservation advocates should work with project proponents through the local preservation review process, and/or the CEQA process to incorporate historic resources into infill development de-sign. The collaborative approach, exemplified by this Case Study, has the potential to inspire more sustainable infill design when historic resources are involved.

Infill Development Projects:

Understanding Impacts to Historical

Resources

California Office of Historic Preservation

CEQA Case Studies

JUNE 2015 VOLUME IV

The California Office of Historic Preservation

comments on CEQA documents as an authority on

historic and cultural resources. This publication uses

case—studies taken from environmental documents

produced in California to help environmental analysts

and lead agencies understand historical and cultural

resource identification and evaluation.

This is not an official policy document, but the

examples included can help professionals and decision

makers understand historic and cultural resource

evaluation as an integral element in successful

completion of the CEQA process.

specific project, but one was not. When making a request for comments from OHP in such a circumstance, OHP should still be given at least two weeks prior to any final action on the project in question to respond. A shorter time frame will general-ly not provide OHP with sufficient time in which to do so. To the extent possible, the same information as described above should be provided.

OHP recognizes that there may be times when no CEQA document is prepared and it is not possible to provide OHP with sufficient information on which to act prior to a lead agency’s final action on a project. In such circumstances, and subject to OHP commenting criteria listed below, OHP may request that the lead agency provide additional time in which OHP may provide further comments. The closer the request is made to anticipated final action by a lead agency, though, the less likely it is

Requests for OHP comments from local agencies and concerned local citizens should be made at least two weeks prior to the end of the comment period for the CEQA document prepared for the project in question. Requests made any closer to the end of the comment period will gener-ally not provide OHP with sufficient time to respond to the request. Requests must be made in writing (e-mail, fax, or mail) and should include as much information as possible about the project (name, location, and project description); historical re-sources information (name of property, location, property description and signifi-cance); lead agency information (contact person, contact information, other in-volved agencies); and CEQA process (document type, comment period).

OHP is occasionally contacted by mem-bers of the public who feel that a CEQA document should have been prepared for a

that OHP will take any action.

OHP is also occasionally contacted by members of the public for advice and assis-tance with general CEQA questions not related to a specific project. OHP will attempt to respond to all written requests for advice and assistance with general CEQA questions within a timely manner. All requests should include the name and affiliation of the person making the request and contact information, including phone number, fax number, and email address. Please allow at least two weeks for OHP to respond.

Requesting CEQA Comments from OHP

The Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) may choose to comment on the CEQA

compliance process for specific local government projects. OHP has commented on

CEQA documents and advised lead agencies since the 1970s. However, it was not

until the adoption of the California Register of Historical Resources regulations in

1992 and the 1998 amendments to CEQA that defined historical resources, that OHP

initiated a specific CEQA program. Because OHP has no formal authority of local

government agencies in California, this program is approached in a more informal

manner than our commenting responsibilities under Section 106 of the National

Historic Preservation Act or comments on state projects under Public Resources

Code Section 5024.5, which pertains to State Owned Historic Properties.

For questions about CEQA and historic and cultural resources, please contact:

Sean de Courcy, at (916) 445-7042 or at [email protected]

Phone: 916-445-7000 Fax: 916-445-7053 E-mail:

California Office of Historic Preservation

Visit us online!

www.ohp.parks.ca.gov

1725 23rd Street, Ste 100 Sacramento, CA 95816-7100

CEQA Case Studies

CEQA Resources

PRC Section 21083.2-

21084.1

CEQA Guidelines CCR

Section 1500-15387

Advocating for Historic

Resources Under CEQA

mailto:[email protected]

http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1054/files/public%20resources%20code.pdf

http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1054/files/public%20resources%20code.pdf

http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/guidelines/

http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/guidelines/

http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21731

http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21731

Appendix B: Air Quality Supplementary Analyses, Update to Draft EIR Appendix B

B‐1. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (Selected Pages)

Quantifying

Greenhouse Gas

Mitigation Measures

A Resource for Local Government

to Assess Emission Reductions from

Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures

August, 2010

dE=dQ-dW

dS=dQ/T

S=klog[ (E)]

CO2 = VMT x EFrunning

[T242001 x (1 - R2001-2005) x (1 - R2005-2008)] + NT24

Quantifying Greenhouse Gas

Mitigation Measures

A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas

Mitigation Measures

August, 2010

California Air Pollution Control Officers

Association

with

Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management

National Association of

Clean Air Agencies

Environ

Fehr & Peers

Acknowledgements

This Report benefited from the hard work and creative insights of many people. CAPCOA appreciates the efforts of all who contributed their time and energy to the project. In particular, the Association thanks the following individuals:

Principal Author

Barbara Lee, NSCAPCD

Project Coordination

Jill Whynot, SCAQMD

Project Oversight Panel

Larry Allen, SLOAPCD Ian Peterson, BAAQMD

Aeron Arlin-Genet, SLOAPCD Tim Taylor, SMAQMD

Dan Barber, SJVAPCD Tom Thompson, PCAQMD

Jeane Berry, SMAQMD David Vintze, BAAQMD

Elaine Chang, SCAQMD Barry Wallerstein, SCAQMD

Yusho Chang, PCAQMD David Warner, SJVAPCD

Joseph Hurley, SMAQMD Jill Whynot, SCAQMD (Vice Chair)

Aaron Katzenstein SCAQMD Abby Young, BAAQMD

Barbara Lee, NSCAPCD (Chair) Mel Zeldin, CAPCOA

Paul Miller, NESCAUM Yifang Zhu, SCAQMD

External Reviewers

Martha Brook, CEC Pete Parkinson, County of Sonoma Bill Loudon, DKS Associates

Editing, Proofing & Layout

Fernando Berton, CAPCOA Arlene Farol, SCAQMD

Jessica DePrimo, NSCAPCD

Technical Analysis & Discussion of Methods

Shari Libicki, Environ Jerry Walters, Fehr & Peers

David Kim, Environ Meghan Mitman, Fehr & Peers

Jennifer Schulte, Environ

Disclaimer

The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) has prepared this report on quantifying greenhouse gas emissions from select mitigation strategies to provide a common platform of information and tools to support local governments. This paper is intended as a resource, not a guidance document. It is not intended, and should not be interpreted, to dictate the manner in which a city or county chooses to address greenhouse gas emissions in the context of projects it reviews, or in the preparation of its General Plan. This paper has been prepared at a time when California law and regulation, as well as accepted practice regarding how climate change should be addressed in government programs, is undergoing change. There is pending litigation that may have bearing on these decisions, as well as active legislation at the federal level. In the face of this uncertainty, local governments are working to understand the new expectations, and how best to meet them. This paper is provided as a resource to local policy and decision makers to enable them to make the best decisions they can during this period of uncertainty. Finally, in order to provide context for the quantification methodologies it describes, this report reviews requirements, discusses policy options, and highlights methods, tools, and resources available; these reviews and discussions are not intended to provide legal advice and should not be construed as such. Questions of legal interpretation, or requests for legal advice, should be directed to the jurisdiction’s counsel.

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 1

Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................... 3 Background .......................................................................................................... 3 Intent and Audience ............................................................................................. 4 Using the Document ............................................................................................. 4

Chapter 2: The Purpose of Quantifying Mitigation Measures .................................. 7 Quantification Framework .................................................................................... 7 Quantifying Measures for Different Purposes....................................................... 8 Voluntary Reductions ........................................................................................... 8 Reductions to Mitigate Current or Future Impacts ................................................ 9 Reductions for Regulatory Compliance ................................................................ 17 Reductions for Credit ........................................................................................... 20

Chapter 3: Quantification Concepts ........................................................................... 25 Baseline ............................................................................................................... 25 Business-as-Usual Scenario ................................................................................ 26 Mitigation Measure Types .................................................................................... 27 Mitigation Measure or Project Scope ................................................................... 29 Lifecycle Analysis ................................................................................................. 29 Accuracy and Reliability ....................................................................................... 31 Additionality .......................................................................................................... 32 Verification ........................................................................................................... 32

Chapter 4: Quantification Approaches & Methods ................................................... 33 General Emission Quantification Approach .......................................................... 33 Quantification of Baseline Emissions ................................................................... 35 Quantification of Emission Reductions for Mitigation Measures ........................... 35 Quantification Methods ....................................................................................... 37 Limitations to Quantification of Emission Reductions for Mitigation Measures ..... 38

Chapter 5: Discussion of Select Quantified Measures ............................................. 43

Building Energy Use ............................................................................................. 43 Outdoor Water Use .............................................................................................. 44 Indoor Water Use ................................................................................................. 45 Municipal Solid Waste .......................................................................................... 45 Public Area and Traffic Signal Lighting ................................................................ 46 Vegetation (including Trees) ................................................................................ 46 Construction Equipment ....................................................................................... 47 Transportation ...................................................................................................... 47 On-site Energy Generation................................................................................... 48 Miscellaneous ...................................................................................................... 48

Chapter 6: Understanding and Using the Fact Sheets ............................................. 51 Mitigation Strategies and Fact Sheets .................................................................. 51 Grouping of Strategies ......................................................................................... 56 Rules for Combining Strategies or Measures ....................................................... 56 Range of Effectiveness of Mitigation Measures ................................................... 63 Applicability of Quantification Fact Sheets Outside of California .......................... 75 How to Use a Fact Sheet to Quantify a Project .................................................... 76

Chapter 7: Quantification Fact Sheets for Individual Measures .............................. 81

Introduction .......................................................................................................... 81 Index of Fact Sheets and Cross References (Table 7-1) ..................................... 82 Measures Energy ................................................................................................................... 85 Transportation ........................................................................................................ 155 Water ..................................................................................................................... 332 Landscaping Equipment......................................................................................... 384 Solid Waste ............................................................................................................ 392 Vegetation.............................................................................................................. 402 Construction ........................................................................................................... 410 Miscellaneous ........................................................................................................ 433 General Plans ........................................................................................................ 444

Appendices

A. Glossary of Terms B. Calculation Methods for Unmitigated Emissions C. Transportation Methods D. Building Quantification Methods E. Select Data Tables


Mitigation Measures

Executive Summary

Executive Summary

1

This report on Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures: A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures was prepared by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association with the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management and the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, and with technical support from Environ and Fehr & Peers. It is primarily focused on the quantification of project-level mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions associated with land use, transportation, energy use, and other related project areas. The mitigation measures quantified in the Report generally correspond to measures previously discussed in CAPCOA’s earlier reports: CEQA and Climate Change; and Model Policies for Greenhouse Gases in General Plans. The Report does not provide policy guidance or advocate any policy position related to greenhouse gas emission reduction. The Report provides a discussion of background information on programs and other circumstances in which quantification of greenhouse gas emissions is important. This includes voluntary emission reduction efforts, project-level emission reduction efforts, reductions for regulatory compliance, and reductions for some form of credit. The information provided covers basic terms and concepts and again, does not endorse or provide guidance on any policy position. Certain key concepts for quantification are covered in greater depth. These include baseline, business-as-usual, types of emission reductions, project scope, lifecycle analysis, accuracy and reliability, additionality, and verification. In order to provide transparency and to enhance the understanding of underlying strengths and weaknesses, the Report includes a detailed explanation of the approaches and methods used in developing the quantification of the mitigation measures. There is a summary of baseline methods (which are discussed in greater detail in Appendix B) as well as a discussion of methods for the measures. This includes the selection process for the measures, the development of the quantification approaches, and limitations in the data used to derive the quantification. The mitigation measures were broken into categories, and an overview is provided for each category. The overview discusses specific considerations in quantifying emissions for measures in the category, as well as project-specific data the user will need to provide. Where appropriate and where data are readily available, the user is directed to relevant data sources. In addition, some tables and other information are included in the appendices. The mitigation measures are presented in Fact Sheets. An overview of the Fact Sheets is provided which outlines their organization and describes the layout of information. The Report also includes a step-by-step guide to using a Fact Sheet to quantify a project, and discusses the use of Fact Sheets outside of California. The Report also discusses the grouping of the measures, and outlines procedures and limitations for

2

Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures

quantifying projects where measures are combined either within or across categories. These limitations are critical to ensure that emission reductions are appropriately quantified and are not double counted. As a general guide, approximate ranges of effectiveness are provided for each of the measures, and this is presented in tables at the end of Chapter 6. These ranges are for reference only and should not be used in lieu of the actual Fact Sheets; they do not provide accurate quantification on a project-specific basis. The Fact Sheets themselves are presented in Chapter 7, which includes an index of the Fact Sheets and cross references each measure to measures described in CAPCOA’s earlier reports: CEQA and Climate Change; and Model Policies for Greenhouse Gases in General Plans. Each Fact Sheet includes a description of the measure, assumptions and limitations in the quantification, a baseline methodology, and the quantification of the measure itself. There is also a sample project calculation, and a discussion of the data and studies used in the development of the quantification. In the Appendices, there is a glossary of terms. The baseline methodology is fully explained, and there is additional supporting information for the transportation methods and the non-transportation methods. Finally, the Report includes select reference tables that the user may consult for select project-specific factors that are called for in some of the Fact Sheets.


Mitigation Measures

Chapter 1

Chapter 1: Introduction

3

Background

The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) prepared the report, Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures: A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (Quantification Report, or Report), in collaboration with the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) and the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA), and with contract support from Environ, and Fehr & Peers, who performed the technical analysis. The Report provides methods for quantifying emission reductions from a specified list of mitigation measures, primarily focused on project-level mitigation. The emissions calculations include greenhouse gases (GHGs), particulate matter (PM), carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and reactive organic gases (ROG), as well as toxic air pollutants, where information is available. The measures included in this Report were selected because they are frequently considered as mitigation for GHG impacts, and standardized methods for quantifying emissions from these projects were not previously available. Measures were screened on the basis of the feasibility of quantifying the emissions, the availability of robust and meaningful data upon which to base the quantification, and whether the measures (alone or in combination with other measures) would result in appreciable reductions in GHG emissions. CAPCOA does not mean to suggest that other measures should not be considered, or that they might not be effective or quantifiable; on the contrary, there are many options and approaches to mitigate emissions of GHGs. CAPCOA sought to provide a high quality quantification tool to local governments with the broadest applicability possible, given the resource limitations for the project. CAPCOA encourages local governments to be bold and creative as they approach the challenge of climate change, and does not intend this Report to limit the scope of measures considered for mitigation. The majority of the measures in the Report have been discussed in CAPCOA’s previous resource documents: CEQA and Climate Change, and Model Policies for Greenhouse Gases in General Plans. The measures in this Report are cross-referenced to those prior reports. The quantification methods provided here are largely project-level in nature; they can certainly inform planning decisions, however a complete planning-level analysis of mitigation strategies will entail additional quantification. In developing the quantification methods, CAPCOA and its contractors conducted an extensive literature review. The goal of the Report was to provide accurate and reliable quantification methods that can be used throughout California and adapted for use outside of the state as well.

4

Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures Intent and Audience This document is intended to further support the efforts of local governments to address the impacts of GHG emissions in their environmental review of projects and in their planning efforts. Project proponents and others interested in quantifying mitigation measures will also find the document useful. The guidance provided in this Report specifically addresses appropriate procedures for applying quantification methods to achieve accurate and reliable results. The Report includes background information on programs and concepts associated with the quantification of GHG emissions. The Report does not provide policy guidance on any of these issues, nor does it dictate how any jurisdiction should address questions of policy. Policy considerations are left to individual agencies and their governing boards. Rather, this Report is intended to support the creation of a standardized approach to quantifying mitigation measures, to allow emission reductions and measure effectiveness to be considered and compared on a common basis. Because the quantification methods in this Report were developed to meet the highest standards for accuracy and reliability, CAPCOA believes they will be generally accepted for most quantification purposes. The decision to accept any quantification method rests with the reviewing agency, however. Further, while the Report discusses the quantification of GHG emissions for a variety of purposes, including the quantification of reductions for credit, using these methods does not guarantee that credit will be awarded. Using the Document Chapters 2 and 3 of this Report discuss programs and concepts associated with GHG quantification. They are intended to provide background information for those interested in the context in which reductions are being made. Chapter 4 discusses the underpinnings of the quantification methods and specifically addresses limitations in the data used as well as limitations in applying the methods; it is important for anyone using this Report to review Chapter 4. Chapter 5 provides an overview of the mitigation measure categories, including key considerations in the quantification of emission reductions in those categories. Chapter 6 explains how to use the fact sheets for each measure’s quantification method, and also discusses the effectiveness of the measures and how combining measures changes the effectiveness. Once the user understands the quantification context, and the limitations of the methods, the fact sheets can be used like recipes in a cookbook . In using the fact sheets, however, CAPCOA strongly advises the reader to pay careful attention to the assumptions and limitations set forth for each individual measure, and to make sure that these are respected and appropriately considered.


Mitigation Measures Chapter 1

5

The fact sheets with the actual quantification methods for each individual measure are contained in Chapter 7. The baseline methods are explained in Appendix B. It is the responsibility of the user to ensure that all data inputs are provided as called for in the methods, and that the data are of appropriate quality. CAPCOA will not be able to provide case-by-case review or adjustments for specific projects outside of the provision for project-specific data inputs that is part of each fact sheet. Questions about individual projects may be referred to your local air district. As a final note, the methods contained in this document include generalized information about the measures themselves. This information includes emission factors, usage rates, and other data from various sources, most commonly published data from public agencies. The data were carefully reviewed to ensure they represent the best information available for this purpose. The use of generalized information allows the quantification methods to be used across a range of circumstances, including variations in geographical location, climate, and population density, among others. Where good quality, project-specific data is available that provides a superior characterization of a particular project, it should be used instead of the more generalized data presented here. The methods provided for baseline and mitigated emissions scenarios allow for such substitution. The local agency reviewing the project should review the project-specific data, however, to ensure that it meets standards for data quality and will not result in an inappropriate under- or overestimation of project emissions or mitigation.

Chapter 6

51

Chapter 6: Understanding and Using the Fact Sheets


Mitigation Measures

This chapter of the Report explains how the quantification of individual strategies is presented in Fact Sheets, how those fact sheets are designed and organized, and how to use them. This chapter also explains how and why mitigation measures have been grouped, and provides detailed discussion of how to apply the quantification methods when more than one strategy is being applied to the same project. A summary of the range of effectiveness for different measures is also provided for general information purposes, in table form, however it is very important that those generalized ranges NOT be used in place of the more specific quantification methods for the measure as detailed in the measure Fact Sheet. Finally, at the end of the Chapter there are step-by-step instructions on using the Fact Sheets, including an example. Mitigation Strategies and Fact Sheets: Accurate and reliable quantification depends on properly identifying the important variables that affect the emissions from an activity or source, and from changes to that activity or source. In order to provide a clear summary of those variables and usable instructions on how to find and apply the data needed, we have designed a Fact Sheet format to present each strategy or measure. Types of Mitigation Strategies: There are three different types of mitigation strategies described in Chapter 7: Quantified measures, Best Management Practices, and General Plan strategies. Quantified Measures: Quantified measures are fully quantified, project-level mitigation strategies. They are presented in categories where the nature of the underlying emissions sources are the same; the categories are discussed under “Organization of Fact Sheets” below. In addition, the measures may either stand alone, or be considered in connection with one or more other measures (that is, “grouped”). Groups of measures are always within a category; more detailed explanation is provided in “Grouping of Strategies” below. The majority of the strategies in this Report are fully Quantified Measures, and a strategy may be assumed to be of this type unless the Fact Sheet notes otherwise. Best Management Practices: Several strategies are denoted as Best Management Practice (BMP). These measures are of two types. The first type of BMPs are quantifiable and describe methods that can be used to quantify the GHG mitigation reductions provided the project Applicant can provide substantial evidence supporting the values needed to quantify the reduction. These are listed as BMPs since there is not adequate literature at this time to generalize the mitigation measure reductions. However, the project Applicant may be able to provide the site specific information necessary to quantify a reduction. The second type of BMPs do not have methods for quantifying GHG mitigation reductions. These measures have preliminary evidence suggesting they will reduce GHG emissions if implemented, however, at this time adequate literature and methodologies are not available to quantify these reductions or

52

Understanding and Using

the Fact Sheets

they involve life-cycle GHG emission benefits. The measures are encouraged to be implemented nonetheless. Local Agencies may decide to provide incentives to encourage implementation of these measures. General Plan Strategies: The measures listed under the General Plan category are measures that will have the most benefit when implemented at a General Plan level, but are not quantifiable or applicable at the project specific level. While on a project basis some of these measures may not be quantifiable, at the General Plan level they may be quantified under the assumption that this will be implemented on a widespread basis. Local Agencies may decide to provide incentives or allocate the General Plan level reductions to specific projects by weighting the overall effect by the number of projects the General Plan reduction would apply to. Introduction to the Fact Sheets: This Report presents the quantification of each mitigation measure in a Fact Sheet format. Each Fact Sheet includes: a detailed summary of each measure’s applicability; the calculation inputs for the specific project; the baseline emissions method; the mitigation calculation method and associated assumptions; a discussion of the calculation and an example calculation; and finally a summary of the preferred and alternative literature sources for measure efficacy. The Fact Sheets are found in Chapter 7. Layout of the Fact Sheets: Each Fact Sheet describes one mitigation measure. The mitigation measure has a unique number and is provided at the bottom of each page in that measure’s Fact Sheet. This will assist the end user in determining where a mitigation measure fact sheet begins and ends while still preserving consecutive page numbers in the overall Report. At the top of each Fact Sheet, the name of the measure category appears on the left, and the subcategory on the right. Cross-references to prior CAPCOA documents appear at the top left, below the category name. Specifically, measures labeled CEQA #: are from the CAPCOA 2008 CEQA & Climate Change1 and measures labeled MP#: are from the CAPCOA 2009 Model Policies for Greenhouse Gases in General Plans2. This cross-referencing is also included in the list of measures at the beginning of Chapter 7, and is intended to allow the user to move easily between the documents. The measure number is at the bottom of the page, on the right-hand side. The fact sheets begin with a measure description. This description includes two critical components:

(1) Specific language regarding the measure implementation – which should be consistent with the implementation method suggested by the project Applicant; and

1 Available online at http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2010/05/CAPCOA-White-Paper.pdf 2 Available online at http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2010/05/CAPCOA-ModelPolicies-6-12-09-

915am.pdf



53

(2) A discussion of key support strategies that are required for the reported range of effectiveness.

Appendices with additional calculations and assumptions for some of the fact sheets are provided at the end of this document. Default assumptions should be carefully reviewed for project applicability. Appendix B details the methodologies that should be used to calculate baseline GHG emissions for a project. Organization of the Fact Sheets – Categories and Subcategories: The Fact Sheets are organized by general emission category types as follows:

Energy Transportation Water Landscape Equipment Solid Waste

Vegetation Construction Miscellaneous Categories General Plans

Several of these main categories are split into subcategories, for ease of understanding how to properly address the effects of combining the measures. Strategies are organized into categories and subcategories where they affect similar types of emissions sources. As an example, the category of “Energy” includes measures that reduce emissions associated with energy generation and use. Within that category, there are subcategories of measures that address “Building Energy Use,” “Alternative Energy,” and “Lighting,” each with one or more measures in it. The measures in the subcategory are closely related to each other. Categories and subcategories for the measures are illustrated in Charts 6-1 and 6-2, below. Chart 6-1 shows all of the measure categories EXCEPT the Transportation category, including their subcategories; note that not all categories have subcategories. Measures in the Transportation category are shown in Chart 6-2. There are a number of subcategories associated with the Transportation category. As shown in Chart 6-2, the primary measures in each subcategory are indicated in bold type, and the measures shown in normal type are either support measures, or they are explicitly “grouped” measures. It is important to note that subcategories are NOT the same as “grouped” measures / strategies. The grouping of strategies connotes a specific relationship, and is explained in the next section, below.

54

U

nd

ers

tan

din

g a

nd

Us

ing

th

e F

ac

t S

hee

ts

Ene

rgy

W

ate

r

Are

a La

nd

scap

ing

BE

A

E

LE

W

SW

W

UW

A

Bu

ildin

g En

erg

y

Alt

ern

ativ

e En

erg

y

Ligh

tin

g

Wat

er

Sup

ply

Wat

er

U

se

La

nd

scap

ing

Eq

uip

me

nt

Exce

ed

Tit

le

24

On

site

R

en

ew

able

En

erg

y

Inst

all

Hig

h

Effi

cacy

Li

ghti

ng

A

do

pt

a W

ate

r

Co

nse

rvat

ion

Str

ate

gy

Pro

hib

it g

as

Po

wer

ed

La

nd

scap

e

Equ

ipm

en

t

OR

Inst

all E

ne

rgy

Effi

cie

nt

Ap

plia

nce

s

Uti

lize

C

om

bin

ed

H

eat

&

Po

wer

Li

mit

O

utd

oo

r Li

ghti

ng

U

se

Re

clai

me

d

Wat

er

In

stal

l Lo

w-F

low

Fi

xtu

res

Imp

lem

ent

Law

nm

ow

er

Exch

ange

P

rogr

am

Red

uct

ion

: G

rou

ped

Inst

all

Pro

gram

mab

le

Ther

mo

stat

s R

edu

ctio

n:

Gro

up

ed

Es

tab

lish

M

eth

ane

R

eco

very

Rep

lace

Tr

affi

c Li

ghts

w

ith

LED

R

edu

ctio

n:

Ad

dit

ion

al

U

se

Gra

ywat

er

De

sign

W

ate

r-Ef

fici

en

t La

nd

scap

es

Elec

tric

Yar

d

Equ

ipm

ent

Co

mp

atib

ility

R

edu

ctio

n

Gro

up

ed

O

bta

in 3

rd

Par

ty

Co

mm

issi

on

ing

Red

uct

ion

: G

rou

ped

Use

Lo

cally

So

urc

ed

W

ate

r

U

se W

ater

-Ef

fici

en

t Ir

riga

tio

n

Re

du

ce

Turf

Pla

nt

Nat

ive

or

Dro

ugh

t-R

esis

tan

t V

eget

atio

n

Not

e: S

trat

egie

s in

bol

d te

xt a

re p

rimar

y st

rate

gies

with

rep

orte

d V

MT

red

uctio

ns;

non-

bold

ed s

trat

egie

s ar

e su

ppor

t or

grou

ped

stra

tegi

es.

Solid

Was

te

V

ege

tati

on

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Mis

cella

ne

ou

s

Ge

ne

ral

Pla

ns

SW

V

C

M

isc

GP

Solid

Was

te

V

ege

tati

on

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Mis

cella

ne

ou

s

Ge

ne

ral

Pla

ns

Inst

itu

te o

r Ex

ten

d

Rec

yclin

g &

C

om

po

stin

g Se

rvic

es

P

lan

t U

rban

Tr

ees

Use

A

lte

rnat

ive

Fu

els

fo

r C

on

stru

ctio

n

Equ

ipm

en

t

Esta

blis

h C

arb

on

Se

qu

est

rati

on

Fun

d

Ince

nti

ves

for

Ener

gy

Effi

cien

cy

Rec

ycle

D

emo

lish

ed

Co

nst

ruct

ion

M

ater

ial

Ne

w

Ve

geta

ted

O

pe

n

Spac

e

Use

Ele

ctri

c o

r H

ybri

d

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Eq

uip

me

nt

Es

tab

lish

Off

-sit

e

Mit

igat

ion

Esta

blis

h a

Lo

cal

Farm

er's

M

arke

t

Lim

it

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Eq

uip

men

t Id

ling

Im

ple

men

t an

In

no

vati

ve

Stra

tegy

Esta

blis

h

Co

mm

un

ity

Gar

den

s

Inst

itu

te a

H

eavy

-Du

ty

Off

-Ro

ad

Veh

icle

Pla

n

U

se L

oca

l an

d

Sust

ain

able

B

uild

ing

Mat

eria

ls

Pla

nt

Urb

an

Shad

e Tr

ees

Imp

lem

ent

a C

on

stru

ctio

n

Veh

icle

In

ven

tory

Tr

acki

ng

Syst

em

R

equ

ire

BM

P in

A

gric

ult

ure

an

d

An

imal

Op

erat

ion

s

Imp

lem

ent

Stra

tegi

es

to R

edu

ce

Urb

an

Hea

t-Is

lan

d

Effe

ct

Req

uir

e En

viro

nm

enta

lly

Res

po

nsi

ble

P

urc

has

ing

Ch

art

6-1

: N

on

-Tra

nsp

ort

ati

on

Str

ate

gie

s O

rga

niz

ati

on

Ch

ap

ter

6

55

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

Mea

sure

s (F

ive

Sub

cate

gorie

s) G

loba

l Max

imum

Red

uctio

n (a

ll V

MT

):

urba

n =

75

%; c

ompa

ct in

fill =

40%

; sub

urba

n ce

nter

or

subu

rban

with

NE

V =

20

%; s

ubur

ban

= 1

5%

Glo

bal C

ap fo

r R

oad

Pric

ing

need

s fu

rthe

r st

udy

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

Mea

sure

s (F

our

Cat

egor

ies)

Cro

ss-C

ateg

ory

Max

Red

uctio

n (a

ll V

MT

):

urb

an =

70

%; c

ompa

ct in

fill =

35%

; sub

urba

n ce

nter

or

subu

rban

with

NE

V =

15

%; s

ubur

ban

= 1

0%

Max

Red

uctio

n =

15%

ov

eral

l; w

ork

VM

T =

25%

; sc

hool

VM

T =

65%

;

Max

Red

uctio

n =

25

% (

all V

MT

)

La

nd U

se /

Loca

tion

N

eigh

borh

ood

/ Site

E

nhan

cem

ent

P

arki

ng P

olic

y /

Pric

ing

Tr

ansi

t Sys

tem

Im

prov

emen

ts

C

omm

ute

Trip

R

educ

tion

(ass

umes

mix

ed u

se)

R

oad

Pric

ing

Man

agem

ent

V

ehic

les

Max

Red

uctio

n:

urba

n =

65%

; com

pact

infil

l =

30%

; sub

urba

n ce

nter

= 1

0%;

subu

rban

= 5

%

M

ax R

educ

tion:

with

out N

EV

= 5

%;

w

ith N

EV

= 1

5%

M

ax R

educ

tion

= 2

0%

M

ax R

educ

tion

= 1

0%

Max

Red

uctio

n =

25%

Max

Red

uctio

n =

25%

(w

ork

VM

T)

D

ensi

ty (

30%

)

Ped

estr

ian

Net

wor

k (2

%)

P

arki

ng S

uppl

y Li

mits

(1

2.5%

)

Net

wor

k E

xpan

sion

(8

.2%

)

CT

R P

rogr

am

R

equi

red

= 2

1% w

ork

VM

T

Vol

unta

ry =

6.2

% w

ork

VM

T

C

ordo

n P

ricin

g (2

2%)

E

lect

rify

Load

ing

Doc

ks

Des

ign

(21.

3%)

T

raffi

c C

alm

ing

(1%

)

Unb

undl

ed P

arki

ng C

osts

(1

3%)

S

ervi

ce F

requ

ency

/ S

peed

(2.

5%)

T

rans

it F

are

Sub

sidy

(20%

wor

k V

MT

)

Tra

ffic

Flo

w

Impr

ovem

ents

(4

5% C

O2)

Util

ize

Alte

rnat

ive

Fue

led

Veh

icle

s

Lo

catio

n E

ffici

ency

(65

%)

NE

V N

etw

ork

(14.

4)

<

NE

V P

arki

ng>

On-

Str

eet M

arke

t Pric

ing

(5

.5%

)

Bus

Rap

id T

rans

it (3

.2%

)

Em

ploy

ee P

arki

ng C

ash

-out

(7

.7%

wor

k V

MT

)

Req

uire

d C

ontr

ibut

ions

by

Pro

ject

Util

ize

Ele

ctric

or

Hyb

rid

Veh

icle

s

D

iver

sity

(30

%)

C

ar S

hare

Pro

gram

(0.

7%)

Res

iden

tial A

rea

Par

king

P

erm

its

A

cces

s Im

prov

emen

ts

Wor

kpla

ce P

arki

ng P

ricin

g (1

9.7%

wor

k V

MT

)

Des

tinat

ion

Acc

essi

bilit

y (2

0%)

Bic

ycle

Net

wor

k

<

Lane

s> <

Par

king

>

<La

nd D

edic

atio

n fo

r T

rails

>

S

tatio

n B

ike

Par

king

Alte

rnat

ive

Wor

k S

ched

ules

&

Tel

ecom

mut

e

(5

.5%

wor

k V

MT

)

Tra

nsit

Acc

essi

bilit

y (2

5%)

Urb

an N

on-M

otor

ized

Z

ones

Loca

l Shu

ttles

CT

R M

arke

ting

(5.5

% w

ork

VM

T)

BM

R H

ousi

ng (

1.2%

)

Par

k &

Rid

e Lo

ts*

Em

ploy

er-S

pons

ored

V

anpo

ol/S

huttl

e

(1

3.4%

wor

k V

MT

)

O

rient

atio

n T

owar

d N

on-

Aut

o C

orrid

or

Rid

e S

hare

Pro

gram

(15%

wor

k V

MT

)

P

roxi

mity

to B

ike

Pat

h

Bik

e S

hare

Pro

gram

End

of T

rip F

acili

ties

N

ote:

Str

ateg

ies

in b

old

text

are

prim

ary

stra

tegi

es w

ith

repo

rted

VM

T r

educ

tions

; non

-bol

ded

stra

tegi

es a

re

supp

ort o

r gr

oupe

d st

rate

gies

.

Pre

fere

ntia

l Par

king

Per

mit

Sch

ool P

ool

(1

5.8%

sch

ool V

MT

)

Sch

ool B

us

(6.3

% s

choo

l VM

T)

Ch

art

6-2

: T

ran

sp

ort

ati

on

Str

ate

gie

s O

rga

niz

ati

on

56

Understanding and Using the Fact Sheets

Grouping of Strategies Strategies noted as “grouped” are separately documented in individual Fact Sheets but must be paired with other strategies within the category. When these “grouped” strategies are implemented together, the combination will result in either an enhancement to the primary strategy by improving its effectiveness or a non-negligible reduction in effectiveness that would not occur without the combination. Rules for Combining Strategies or Measures Mitigation measures or strategies are frequently implemented together with other measures. Often, combining measures can lead to better emission reductions than implementing a single measure by itself. Unfortunately, the effects of combining the measures are not always as straightforward as they might at first appear. When more and more measures are implemented to mitigate a particular source of emissions, the benefit of each additional measure diminishes. If it didn’t, some odd results would occur. For example, if there were a series of measures that each, independently, was predicted to reduce emissions from a source by 10%, and if the effect of each measure was independent of the others, then implementing ten measures would reduce all of the emissions; and what would happen with the eleventh measure? Would the combination reduce 110% of the emissions? No. In fact, each successive measure is slightly less effective than predicted when implemented on its own. On the other hand, some measures enhance the performance of a primary measure when they are combined. This Report includes a set of rules that govern different ways of combining measures. The rules depend on whether the measures are in the same category, or different categories. Remember, the categories include: Energy, Transportation, Water, Landscape Equipment, Solid Waste, Vegetation, Construction, Miscellaneous Categories, and General Plans. Combinations Between Categories: The following procedures must be followed when combining mitigation measures that fall in separate categories. In order to determine the overall reduction in GHG emissions compared to the baseline emissions, the relative magnitude of emissions between the source categories needs to be considered. To do this, the user should determine the percent contribution made by each individual category to the overall baseline GHG emissions. This percent contribution by a category should be multiplied by the reduction percentages from mitigation measures in that category to determine the scaled GHG emission reductions from the measures in that category. This is done for each category to be combined. The scaled GHG emissions for each category can then be added together to give a total GHG reduction for the combined measures in all of the categories. For example, consider a project whose total GHG emissions come from the following categories: transportation (50%), building energy use (40%), water (6%), and other (4%). This project implements a transportation mitigation measure that results in a 10% reduction in VMT. The project also implements mitigation measures that result in a 30% reduction in water usage. The overall reduction in GHG emissions is as follows:

Chapter 6



57

Reduction from Transportation: 0.50 x 0.10 = 0.5 or 5% Reduction from Water: 0.06 x 0.30 = 0.018 or 1.8% Total Reduction: 5% + 1.8% = 6.8%

This example illustrates the importance of the magnitude of a source category and its influence on the overall GHG emission reductions. The percent contributions from source categories will vary from project to project. In a commercial-only project it may not be unusual for transportation emissions to represent greater than 75% of all GHG emissions whereas for a residential or mixed use project, transportation emissions would be below 50%. Combinations Within Categories: The following procedures must be followed when combining mitigation measures that fall within the same category. Non-Transportation Combinations: When combining non-transportation subcategories, the total amount of reductions for that category should not exceed 100% except for categories that would result in additional excess capacity that can be used by others, but which the project wants to take credit for (subject to approval of the reviewing agency). This may include alternative energy generation systems tied into the grid, vegetation measures, and excess graywater or recycled water generated by the project and used by others. These excess emission reductions may be used to offset other categories of emissions, with approval of the agency reviewing the project. In these cases of excess capacity, the quantified amounts of excess emissions must be carefully verified to ensure that any credit allowed for these additional reductions is truly surplus.

Category Maximum- Each category has a maximum allowable reduction for the combination of measures in that category. It is intended to ensure that emissions are not double counted when measures within the category are combined. Effectiveness levels for multiple strategies within a subcategory (as denoted by a column in the appropriate chart, above) may be multiplied to determine a combined effectiveness level up to a maximum level. This should be done first to mitigation measures that are a source reduction followed by those that are a reduction to emission factors. Since the combination of mitigation measures and independence of mitigation measures are both complicated, this Report recommends that mitigation measure reductions within a category be multiplied unless a project applicant can provide substantial evidence indicating that emission reductions are independent of one another. This will take the following form:

GHG emission reduction for category = 1-[(1-A) x (1-B) x (1-C)] Where: A, B and C = Individual mitigation measure reduction percentages for the strategies to be

combined in a given category.

58


Global Maximum- A separate maximum, referred to as a global maximum level, is also provided for a combination across subcategories. Effectiveness levels for multiple strategies across categories may also be multiplied to determine a combined effectiveness level up to global maximum level. For example, consider a project that is combining 3 mitigation strategies from the water category. This project will install low-flow fixtures (measure WUW-1), use water-efficient irrigation (measure WUW-4, and reduce turf (measure WUW-5). Reductions from these measures will be:

low-flow fixtures 20% or 0.20 (A) water efficient irrigation 10% or 0.10 (B) turf reductions 20% or 0.20 (C)

To combine measures within a category, the reductions would be = 1-[(1-A) x (1-B) x (1-C)] = 1-[(1-.20) x (1-.10) x (1-.20)] = 1-[(0.8) x (0.9) x (.8)] = 1-0.576 = 0.424 = 42.4%

Transportation Combinations: The interactions between the various categories of transportation-related mitigation measures is complex and sometimes counter-intuitive. Combining these measures can have a substantive impact on the quantification of the associated emission reductions. In order to safeguard the accuracy and reliability of the methods, while maintaining their ease of use, the following rules have been developed and should be followed when combining transportation-related mitigation measures. The rules are presented by sub-category, and reference Chart 6-2 Transportation Strategies Organization. The maximum reduction values also reflect the highest reduction levels justified by the literature. The chart indicates maximum reductions for individual mitigation measures just below the measure name.

Cross-Category Maximum- A cross-category maximum is provided for any combination of land use, neighborhood enhancements, parking, and transit strategies (columns A-D in Chart 6-1, with the maximum shown in the top row). The total project VMT reduction across these categories should be capped at these levels based on empirical evidence.3 Caps are provided for the location/development type of the project. VMT reductions may be multiplied across the four categories up to this maximum. These include:

Urban: 70% VMT Compact Infill: 35% Suburban Center (or Suburban with NEV): 15% Suburban: 10% (note that projects with this level of reduction must include a diverse

land use mix, workforce housing, and project-specific transit; limited empirical evidence is available)

(See blue box, pp. 58-59.) 3 As reported by Holtzclaw, et al for the State of California.

Chapter 6



59

As used in this Report, location settings are defined as follows:

Urban: A project located within the central city and may be characterized by multi-family housing, located near office and retail. Downtown Oakland and the Nob Hill neighborhood in San Francisco are examples of the typical urban area represented in this category. The urban maximum reduction is derived from the average of the percentage difference in per capita VMT versus the California statewide average (assumed analogous to an ITE baseline) for the following locations:

Location Percent Reduction from Statewide VMT/Capita

Central Berkeley -48%

San Francisco -49%

Pacific Heights (SF) -79%

North Beach (SF) -82%

Mission District (SF) -75%

Nob Hill (SF) -63%

Downtown Oakland -61%

The average reflects a range of 48% less VMT/capita (Central Berkeley) to 82% less VMT/capita (North Beach, San Francisco) compared to the statewide average. The urban locations listed above have the following characteristics: o Location relative to the regional core: these locations are within the CBD or less than five miles from the CBD (downtown Oakland and

downtown San Francisco). o Ratio or relationship between jobs and housing: jobs-rich (jobs/housing ratio greater than 1.5) o Density character

typical building heights in stories: six stories or (much) higher

typical street pattern: grid

typical setbacks: minimal

parking supply: constrained on and off street

parking prices: high to the highest in the region o Transit availability: high quality rail service and/or comprehensive bus service at 10 minute headways or less in peak hours

Compact infill: A project located on an existing site within the central city or inner-ring suburb with high-frequency transit service. Examples may be community redevelopment areas, reusing abandoned sites, intensification of land use at established transit stations, or converting underutilized or older industrial buildings. Albany and the Fairfax area of Los Angeles are examples of typical compact infill area as used here. The compact infill maximum reduction is derived from the average of the percentage difference in per capita VMT versus the California statewide average for the following locations:


Franklin Park, Hollywood -22%

Albany -25%

Fairfax Area, Los Angeles -29%

Hayward -42%

The average reflects a range of 22% less VMT/capita (Franklin Park, Hollywood) to 42% less VMT/capita (Hayward) compared to the statewide average. The compact infill locations listed above have the following characteristics: o Location relative to the regional core: these locations are typically 5 to 15 miles outside a regional CBD o Ratio or relationship between jobs and housing: balanced (jobs/housing ratio ranging from 0.9 to 1.2) o Density character

typical building heights in stories: two to four stories


typical setbacks: 0 to 20 feet

parking supply: constrained

parking prices: low to moderate o Transit availability: rail service within two miles, or bus service at 15 minute peak headways or less

60


Global Maximum- A global maximum is provided for any combination of land use, neighborhood enhancements, parking, transit, and commute trip reduction strategies (the first five columns in the organization chart). This excludes reductions from road-pricing measurements which are discussed separately below. The total project VMT reduction across these categories, which can be combined through multiplication, should be capped

As used in this Report, additional location settings are defined as follows:

Suburban Center: A project typically involving a cluster of multi-use development within dispersed, low-density, automobile dependent land use patterns (a suburb). The center may be an historic downtown of a smaller community that has become surrounded by its region’s suburban growth pattern in the latter half of the 20th Century. The suburban center serves the population of the suburb with office, retail and housing which is denser than the surrounding suburb. The suburban center maximum reduction is derived from the average of the percentage difference in per capita VMT versus the California statewide average for the following locations:


Sebastopol 0%

San Rafael (Downtown) -10%

San Mateo -17%

The average reflects a range of 0% less VMT/capita (Sebastopol) to 17% less VMT/capita (San Mateo) compared to the statewide average. The suburban center locations listed above have the following characteristics:

o Location relative to the regional core: these locations are typically 20 miles or more from a regional CBD o Ratio or relationship between jobs and housing: balanced o Density character

typical building heights in stories: two stories


typical setbacks: 0 to 20 feet

parking supply: somewhat constrained on street; typically ample off-street

parking prices: low (if priced at all) o Transit availability: bus service at 20-30 minute headways and/or a commuter rail station

While all three locations in this category reflect a suburban “downtown,” San Mateo is served by regional rail (Caltrain) and the other locations are served by bus transit only. Sebastopol is located more than 50 miles from downtown San Francisco, the nearest urban center. San Rafael and San Mateo are located 20 miles from downtown San Francisco.

Suburban: A project characterized by dispersed, low-density, single-use, automobile dependent land use patterns, usually outside of the central city (a suburb). Suburbs typically have the following characteristics: o Location relative to the regional core: these locations are typically 20 miles or more from a regional CBD o Ratio or relationship between jobs and housing: jobs poor o Density character

typical building heights in stories: one to two stories

typical street pattern: curvilinear (cul-de-sac based)

typical setbacks: parking is generally placed between the street and office or retail buildings; large-lot residential is common

parking supply: ample, largely surface lot-based

parking prices: none o Transit availability: limited bus service, with peak headways 30 minutes or more

The maximum reduction provided for this category assumes that regardless of the measures implemented, the project’s distance from transit, density, design, and lack of mixed use destinations will keep the effect of any strategies to a minimum.

Chapter 6



61

at these levels based on empirical evidence.4 Maximums are provided for the location/development type of the project. The Global Maximum values can be found in the top row of Chart 6-2. These include:

Urban: 75% VMT Compact Infill: 40% VMT Suburban Center (or Suburban with NEV): 20% Suburban: 15% (limited empirical evidence available)

Specific Rules for Subcategories within Transportation- Because of the unique interactions of measures within the Transportation Category, each subcategory has additional rules or criteria for combining measures.

Land Use/Location Strategies – Maximum Reduction Factors: Land use measures apply

to a project area with a radius of ½ mile. If the project area under review is greater than this, the study area should be divided into subareas of radii of ½ mile, with subarea boundaries determined by natural “clusters” of integrated land uses within a common walkshed. If the project study area is smaller than ½ mile in radius, other land uses within a ½ mile radius of the key destination point in the study area (i.e. train station or employment center) should be included in design, density, and diversity calculations. Land use measures are capped based on empirical evidence for location setting types as follows:5

Urban: 65% VMT Compact Infill: 30% VMT Suburban Center: 10% VMT Suburban: 5% VMT

Neighborhood/Site Enhancements Strategies – Maximum Reduction Factors: The

neighborhood/site enhancements category is capped at 12.7% VMT reduction (with Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs)) and 5% without NEVs based on empirical evidence (for NEVs) and the multiplied combination of the non-NEV measures.

Parking Strategies – Maximum Reduction Factors: Parking strategies should be

implemented in one of two combinations: Limited (reduced) off-street supply ratios plus residential permit parking and

priced on-street parking (to limit spillover), or Unbundled parking plus residential permit parking and priced on-street

parking (to limit spillover).

4 As reported by Holtzclaw, et al for the State of California. Note that CTR strategies must be converted to overall VMT

reductions (from work-trip VMT reductions) before being combined with strategies in other categories. 5 As reported for California locations in Holtzclaw, et al. “Location Efficiency: Neighborhood and Socioeconomic

Characteristics Determine Auto Ownership and Use – Studies in Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Francisco.” Transportation Planning and Technology, 2002, Vol. 25, pp. 1–27.

62


Note: The reduction maximum of 20% VMT reflects the combined (multiplied) effect of unbundled parking and priced on-street parking.

Transit System Strategies – Maximum Reduction Factors: The 10% VMT reduction

maximum for transit system improvements reflects the combined (multiplied) effect of network expansion and service frequency/speed enhancements. A comprehensive transit improvement would receive this type of reduction, as shown in the center overlap in the Venn diagram, below.

Commuter Trip Reductions (CTR) Strategies – Maximum Reduction Factors: The

most effective commute trip reduction measures combine incentives, disincentives, and mandatory monitoring, often through a transportation demand management (TDM) ordinance. Incentives encourage a particular action, for example parking cash-out, where the employee receives a monetary incentive for not driving to work, but is not punished for maintaining status quo. Disincentives establish a penalty for a status quo action. An example is workplace parking pricing, where the employee is now monetarily penalized for driving to work. The 25% maximum for work-related VMT applies to comprehensive CTR programs. TDM strategies that include only incentives, only disincentives, and/or no mandatory monitoring, should have a lower total VMT reduction than those with a comprehensive approach. Support strategies to strengthen CTR programs include guaranteed-ride-home, taxi vouchers, and message boards/marketing materials. A 25% reduction in work-related VMT is assumed equivalent to a 15% reduction in overall project VMT for the purpose of the global maximum; this can be adjusted for project-specific land use mixes.

Two school-related VMT reduction measures are also provided in this category. The maximum reduction for these measures should be 65% of school-related VMT based on the literature.

Chapter 6



63

Road Pricing/Management Strategies – Maximum Reduction Factors: Cordon pricing is the only strategy in this category with an expected VMT reduction potential. Other forms of road pricing would be applied at a corridor or region-wide level rather than as mitigation applied to an individual development project. No domestic case studies are available for cordon pricing, but international studies suggest a VMT reduction maximum of 25%. A separate, detailed, and project-specific study should be conducted for any project where road pricing is proposed as a VMT reduction measure.

Additional Rules for Transportation Measures- There are also restrictions on the application of measures in rural applications, and application to baseline, as follows:

Rural Application: Few empirical studies are available to suggest appropriate VMT

reduction caps for strategies implemented in rural areas. Strategies likely to have the largest VMT reduction in rural areas include vanpools, telecommute or alternative work schedules, and master planned communities (with design and land use diversity to encourage intra-community travel). NEV networks may also be appropriate for larger scale developments. Because of the limited empirical data in the rural context, project-specific VMT reduction estimates should be calculated.

Baseline Application: As discussed in previous sections of this report, VMT

reductions should be applied to a baseline VMT expected for the project, based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ 8th Edition Trip Generation Manual and associated typical trip distance for each land use type. Where trip generation rates and project VMT provided by the project Applicant are derived from another source, the VMT reductions must be adjusted to reflect any “discounts” already applied.

Range of Effectiveness of Mitigation Measures The following charts provide the range of effectiveness for the quantified mitigation measures. Each chart shows one category of measures, with subcategories identified. The charts also show the basis for the quantification, and indicate applicable groupings. IMPORTANT: these ranges are approximate and should NOT be used in lieu of the specific quantification method provided in the fact sheet for each measure. Restrictions on combining measures must be observed.

Chapter 6

65

Understanding

Fact Sheets

Chapter 6

Transportation

Category Measure Number

Strategy BMP Grouped With #

Range of Effectiveness

Percent Reduction in GHG Emissions

Basis

Land

Use

/ Lo

catio

n

LUT-1 Increase Density 1.5-30.0% VMT

LUT-2 Increase Location Efficiency 10-65% VMT

LUT-3 Increase Diversity of Urban and Suburban Developments (Mixed Use)

9-30% VMT

LUT-4 Incr. Destination Accessibility 6.7-20% VMT

LUT-5 Increase Transit Accessibility 0.5-24.6% VMT

LUT-6 Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing 0.04-1.20% VMT

LUT-7 Orient Project Toward Non-Auto Corridor NA

LUT-8 Locate Project near Bike Path/Bike Lane NA

LUT-9 Improve Design of Development 3.0-21.3% VMT

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d / S

ite D

esig

n

SDT-1 Provide Pedestrian Network Improvements

0-2% VMT

SDT-2 Traffic Calming Measures 0.25-1.00% VMT

SDT-3 Implement a Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Network

0.5-12.7% VMT

SDT-4 Urban Non-Motorized Zones SDT-1 NA

SDT-5 Incorporate Bike Lane Street Design (on-site)

LUT-9 NA

SDT-6 Provide Bike Parking in Non-Residential Projects

LUT-9 NA

SDT-7 Provide Bike Parking in Multi-Unit Residential Projects LUT-9 NA

SDT-8 Provide EV Parking SDT-3 NA SDT-9 Dedicate Land for Bike Trails LUT-9 NA

Par

king

P

olic

y / P

ricin

g

PDT-1 Limit Parking Supply 5-12.5%

PDT-2 Unbundle Parking Costs from Property Cost

2.6-13%

PDT-3 Implement Market Price Public Parking (On-Street)

2.8-5.5%

PDT-4 Require Residential Area Parking Permits

PDT-1, 2 & 3

NA

Table 6-2: Transportation Category

66

Understanding Fact Sheets

Transportation - continued



Range of Effectiveness Percent Reduction in GHG Emissions

Basis

Trip

Red

uctio

n P

rogr

ams

TRT-1 Implement Voluntary CTR Programs

1.0-6.2% Commute

VMT

TRT-2 Implement Mandatory CTR Programs – Required Implementation/Monitoring

4.2-21.0% Commute

VMT

TRT-3 Provide Ride-Sharing Programs

1-15% Commute

VMT

TRT-4 Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Prog.

0.3-20.0% Commute

VMT

TRT-5 Provide End of Trip Facilities

TRT-1, 2

& 3 NA

TRT-6 Telecommuting and Alternative Work Schedules

0.07-5.50% Commute

VMT

TRT-7 Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing

0.8-4.0% Commute

VMT

TRT-8 Implement Preferential Parking Permit Program

TRT-1, 2

& 3 NA

TRT-9 Implement Car-Sharing Program

0.4-0.7% VMT

TRT-10 Implement School Pool Program

7.2-15.8% School VMT

TRT-11 Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle 0.3-13.4%

Commute VMT

TRT-12 Implement Bike-Sharing Program

SDT-5, LUT-9

NA

TRT-13 Implement School Bus Program 38-63%

School VMT

TRT-14 Price Workplace Parking 0.1-19.7% Commute

VMT

TRT-15 Implement Employee Parking “Cash-Out” 0.6-7.7%

Commute VMT

Chapter 6

67

Understanding

Fact Sheets

Chapter 6

Transportation - continued



Range of Effectiveness

Percent Reduction in GHG Emissions

Basis

Tran

sit S

yste

m Im

prov

emen

ts TST-1 Provide a Bus Rapid Transit

System 0.02-3.2% VMT

TST-2 Implement Transit Access Improvements

TST-3, TST-4

NA

TST-3 Expand Transit Network 0.1-8.2% VMT

TST-4 Increase Transit Service Frequency/Speed 0.02-2.5% VMT

TST-5 Provide Bike Parking Near Transit

TST-3, TST-4

NA

TST-6 Provide Local Shuttles TST-3, TST-4

NA

Roa

d P

ricin

g /

Man

agem

ent

RPT-1 Implement Area or Cordon Pricing 7.9-22.0% VMT

RPT-2 Improve Traffic Flow 0-45% VMT

RPT-3 Require Project Contributions to Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Projects

RPT-2, TST-1 to 6

NA

RPT-4 Install Park-and-Ride Lots

RPT-1, TRT-11, TRT-3,

TST-1 to 6

NA

Veh

icle

s

VT-1 Electrify Loading Docks and/or Require Idling-Reduction Systems

26-71% Truck

Idling Time

VT-2 Utilize Alternative Fueled Vehicles Varies

VT-3 Utilize Electric or Hybrid Vehicles 0.4-20.3% Fuel Use

Chapter 7

81

Chapter 7: Fact Sheets 1.0 Introduction

Chapter 7 is made up of a series of Fact Sheets. Each sheet summarizes the quantification methodology for a specific mitigation measure. As described in Chapter 6, the measures are grouped into Categories, and, in some cases, into subcategories. For information about the development of the Fact Sheets, please see Chapter 4. For a discussion of specific quantification issues in select measure categories or subcategories, please refer to Chapter 5. Chapter 6 provides a detailed explanation of the organization and layout of the Fact Sheets, including rules that govern the quantification of measures that have been, or will be, implemented in combination.

In order to facilitate navigation through, and the use of, the Fact Sheets, they have been color coded to reflect the Category the measure is in, and if applicable, the subcategory. The color scheme is shown in Charts 6-1 and 6-2, and also in Table 7-1 (below).

The colored bar at the top of each Fact Sheet corresponds to the Category color as shown in Charts 6-1 and 6-2, and in Table 7-1; the Category name is shown in the colored bar at the left hand margin. The second colored bar, immediately below the first one, shows the name of the subcategory, if any, and corresponds to subcategory color in those charts and tables. The subcategory name appears at the right hand margin.

At the left hand margin, below the Category name, is a cross-reference to the corresponding measure in the previous two CAPCOA reports (CEQA and GHG; and Model Polices for GHG in General Plans). The term “MP#” refers to a measure in the Model Policies document. The term CEQA# refers to a measure in the CEQA and GHG report.

At the bottom of the page is a colored bar that corresponds to the Category, and, where applicable, there is a colored box at the right hand margin, contiguous with the colored bar. This color of the box corresponds to the subcategory, where applicable. The box contains the measure number.

The layout of information in each Fact Sheet is covered in detail in Chapter 6.

Table 7-1, below, provides an index and cross-reference for the measure Fact Sheets. It is color-coded, as explained above, and may be used as a key to more quickly and easily navigate through the Fact Sheets

Fact Sheets

82

Table 7-1: Measure Index & Cross Reference

Section Category Page

# Measure

# BMP

MP #

CEQA #

2.0 Energy 85

2.1 Building Energy Use 85

2.1.1 Buildings Exceed Title 24 Building Envelope Energy Efficiency Standards By X% 85 BE-1

EE-2 MM-E6

2.1.2 Install Programmable Thermostat Timers 99 BE-2 x EE-2 -

2.1.3 Obtain Third-party HVAC Commissioning and Verification of Energy Savings 101 BE-3 x EE-2 -

2.1.4 Install Energy Efficient Appliances 103 BE-4

EE-2.1.6 MM E-19

2.1.5 Install Energy Efficient Boilers 111 BE-5

- -

2.2 Lighting 115

2.2.1 Install Higher Efficacy Public Street and Area Lighting 115 LE-1

EE-2.1.5 -

2.2.2 Limit Outdoor Lighting Requirements 119 LE-2 x EE-2.3

2.2.3 Replace Traffic Lights with LED Traffic Lights 122 LE-3

EE-2.1.5 -

2.3 Alternative Energy Generation 125

2.3.1 Establish Onsite Renewable Energy Systems-Generic 125 AE-1

AE-2.1 MM E-5

2.3.2 Establish Onsite Renewable Energy Systems-Solar Power 128 AE-2

AE-2.1 MM E-5

2.3.3 Establish Onsite Renewable Energy Systems-Wind Power 132 AE-3

AE-2.1 MM E-5

2.3.4 Utilize a Combined Heat and Power System 135 AE-4

AE-2 -

2.3.5 Establish Methane Recovery in Landfills 143 AE-5

WRD-1 -

2.3.6 Establish Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment Plants 149 AE-6

3.0 Transportation 155

3.1 Land Use/Location 155

3.1.1 Increase Density 155 LUT-1

LU-1.5 & LU-2.1.8 MM D-1 & D-4

3.1.2 Increase Location Efficiency 159 LUT-2

LU-3.3 -

3.1.3 Increase Diversity of Urban and Suburban Developments (Mixed Use) 162 LUT-3

LU-2 MM D-9 & D-4

3.1.4 Increase Destination Accessibility 167 LUT-4

LU-2.1.4 MM D-3

3.1.5 Increase Transit Accessibility 171 LUT-5

LU-1,LU-4 MM D-2

3.1.6 Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing 176 LUT-6

LU-2.1.8 MM D-7

3.1.7 Orient Project Toward Non-Auto Corridor 179 LUT-7

LU-4.2 LUT-3

3.1.8 Locate Project near Bike Path/Bike Lane 181 LUT-8

- LUT-4

3.1.9 Improve Design of Development 182 LUT-9

- -

3.2 Neighborhood/Site Enhancements 186

3.2.1 Provide Pedestrian Network Improvements 186 SDT-1

LU-4 MM-T-6

3.2.2 Provide Traffic Calming Measures 190 SDT-2

LU-1.6 MM-T-8

3.2.3 Implement a Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Network 194 SDT-3

TR-6 MM-D-6

3.2.4 Create Urban Non-Motorized Zones 198 SDT-4

LU-3.2.1 & 4.1.4 SDT-1

3.2.5 Incorporate Bike Lane Street Design (on-site) 200 SDT-5

TR-4.1 LUT-9

3.2.6 Provide Bike Parking in Non-Residential Projects 202 SDT-6

TR-4.1 MM T-1

3.2.7 Provide Bike Parking with Multi-Unit Residential Projects 204 SDT-7

TR-4.1.2 MM T-3

3.2.8 Provide Electric Vehicle Parking 205 SDT-8

TR-5.4 MM T-17 & E-11

3.2.9 Dedicate Land for Bike Trails 206 SDT-9

TR-4.1 LUT-9

3.3 Parking Policy/Pricing 207

3.3.1 Limit Parking Supply 207 PDT-1

LU-1.7 & LU-2.1.1.4 -

3.3.2 Unbundle Parking Costs from Property Cost 210 PDT-2

LU-1.7 -

3.3.3 Implement Market Price Public Parking (On-Street) 213 PDT-3

- -

3.3.4 Require Residential Area Parking Permits 217 PDT-4

-

PDT-1, PDT-2, PDT-3

Fact Sheets

83


# Measure

# BMP

MP #

CEQA #

3.4 Commute Trip Reduction Programs 218

3.4.1 Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program - Voluntary 218 TRT-1

- -

3.4.2

Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program – Required Implementation/Monitoring 223 TRT-2

MO-3.1 T-19

3.4.3 Provide Ride-Sharing Programs 227 TRT-3

MO-3.1 -

3.4.4 Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program 230 TRT-4

MO-3.1 -

3.4.5 Provide End of Trip Facilities 234 TRT-5

MO-3.2

TRT-1, TRT-2, TRT-3

3.4.6 Encourage Telecommuting and Alternative Work Schedules 236 TRT-6

TR-3.5 -

3.4.7 Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing 240 TRT-7

- -

3.4.8 Implement Preferential Parking Permit Program 244 TRT-8

TR-3.1

TRT-1, TRT-2, TRT-3

3.4.9 Implement Car-Sharing Program 245 TRT-9

- -

3.4.10 Implement a School Pool Program 250 TRT-10

- -

3.4.11 Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle 253 TRT-11

MO-3.1 -

3.4.12 Implement Bike-Sharing Programs 256 TRT-12

- SDT-5, LUT-9

3.4.13 Implement School Bus Program 258 TRT-13

TR-3.4 -

3.4.14 Price Workplace Parking 261 TRT-14

- -

3.4.15 Implement Employee Parking “Cash-Out” 266 TRT-15

TR-5.3 MM T-9

3.5 Transit System Improvements 270

3.5.1 Provide a Bus Rapid Transit System 270 TST-1

- MS-G3

3.5.2 Implement Transit Access Improvements 275 TST-2

LU-3.4.3 TST-3, TST-4

3.5.3 Expand Transit Network 276 TST-3

- MS-G3

3.5.4 Increase Transit Service Frequency/Speed 280 TST-4

- MS-G3

3.5.5 Provide Bike Parking Near Transit 285 TST-5

TR-4.1.4 TST-3, TST-4

3.5.6 Provide Local Shuttles 286 TST-6

TST-3, TST-4

3.6 Road Pricing/Management 287

3.6.1 Implement Area or Cordon Pricing 287 RPT-1

TR-3.6 -

3.6.2 Improve Traffic Flow 291 RPT-2

TR-2.1, TR-2.2 -

3.6.3

Required Project Contributions to Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Projects 297 RPT-3

-

RPT-2, TST-1 to 6

3.6.4

Install Park-and-Ride Lots

298

RPT-4

TR-1

RPT-1, TRT-11, TRT-3, TST-1 to 6

3.7 Vehicles 300

3.7.1 Electrify Loading Docks and/or Require Idling-Reduction Systems 300 VT-1

TR-6 -

3.7.2 Utilize Alternative Fueled Vehicles 304 VT-2

- MM T-21

3.7.3 Utilize Electric or Hybrid Vehicles 309 VT-3

- MM T-20

4.0 Water 332

4.1 Water Supply 332

4.1.1 Use Reclaimed Water 332 WSW-1

COS-1.3 MS-G-8

4.1.2 Use Gray Water 336 WSW-2

COS-2.3 -

4.1.3 Use Locally Sourced Water Supply 341 WSW-3

- -

4.2 Water Use 347

4.2.1 Install Low-Flow Water Fixtures 347 WUW-1

EE-2.1.6; COS 2.2 MM-E23

4.2.2 Adopt a Water Conservation Strategy 362 WUW-2

COS-1. MS-G-8

4.2.3 Design Water-Efficient Landscapes 365 WUW-3

COS-2.1 -

4.2.4 Use Water-Efficient Landscape Irrigation Systems 372 WUW-4

COS-3.1 MS-G-8

4.2.5 Reduce Turf in Landscapes and Lawns 376 WUW-5

- -

4.2.6 Plant Native or Drought-Resistant Trees and Vegetation 381 WUW-6 x COS-3.1 MM D-16

Fact Sheets

83


# Measure

# BMP

MP #

CEQA #

5.0 Area Landscaping 384

5.1 Landscaping Equipment 384

5.1.1 Prohibit Gas Powered Landscape Equipment. 384 A-1

- -

5.1.2 Implement Lawnmower Exchange Program 389 A-2 x EE-4.2 MM D-13

5.1.3 Electric Yard Equipment Compatibility 391 A-3 x MO-2.4

A-1 or A-2; MM D-14

6.0 Solid Waste 392

6.1 Solid Waste 392

6.1.1 Institute or Extend Recycling and Composting Services 401 SW-1 x WRD-2 MM D-14

6.1.2 Recycle Demolished Construction Material 402 SW-2 x WRD-2.3 MM C-4

7.0 Vegetation 402

7.1 Vegetation 402

7.1.1 Urban Tree Planting 402 V-1

COS-3.3, COS 3.2 GP-4, MM T-14

7.1.2 Create New Vegetated Open Space 406 V-2

COS-4.1 -

8.0 Construction 410

8.1 Construction 410

8.1.1 Use Alternative Fuels for Construction Equipment 410 C-1

TR-6, EE-1 MM C-2

8.1.2 Use Electric and Hybrid Construction Equipment 420 C-2

TR-6, EE-1 -

8.1.3 Limit Construction Equipment Idling beyond Regulation Requirements 428 C-3

TR-6.2 -

8.1.4 Institute a Heavy-Duty Off-Road Vehicle Plan 431 C-4 x

TR-6.2, EE-1 Any C

8.1.5 Implement a Construction Vehicle Inventory Tracking System 432 C-5 x - -

9.0 Miscellaneous 433

9.1 Miscellaneous 433

9.1.1 Establish a Carbon Sequestration Project 433 Misc-1

LU-5 -

9.1.2 Establish Off-Site Mitigation 435 Misc-2

- -

9.1.3 Use Local and Sustainable Building Materials 437 Misc-3 x EE-1 MM C-3, E-17

9.1.4 Require Best Management Practices in Agriculture and Animal Operations 439 Misc-4 x - -

9.1.5 Require Environmentally Responsible Purchasing 440 Misc-5 x MO-6.1 -

9.1.6 Implement an Innovative Strategy for GHG Mitigation 442 Misc-6 x - -

10.0 General Plans 444

10.1 General Plans 444

10.1.1 Fund Incentives for Energy Efficiency 444 GP-1 x - -

10.1.2 Establish a Local Farmer's Market 446 GP-2 x LU-2.1.4 MM D-18

10.1.3 Establish Community Gardens 448 GP-3 x LU-2.1.4 MM D-19

10.1.4 Plant Urban Shade Trees 450 GP-4 x COS-3.2 V-1, MM T-14

10.1.5 Implement Strategies to Reduce Urban Heat-Island Effect 455 GP-5 x LU-6.1 MM E-8, E-12

8

4

84


# Measure

#

3.0 Transportation

155

3.1 Land Use/Location 155

3.1.1 Increase Density 155 LUT-1

3.1.2 Increase Location Efficiency 159 LUT-2

3.1.3 Increase Diversity of Urban and Suburban Developments (Mixed Use) 162 LUT-3

3.1.4 Increase Destination Accessibility 167 LUT-4

3.1.5 Increase Transit Accessibility 171 LUT-5

3.1.6 Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing 176 LUT-6

3.1.7 Orient Project Toward Non-Auto Corridor 179 LUT-7

3.1.8 Locate Project near Bike Path/Bike Lane 181 LUT-8

3.1.9 Improve Design of Development 182 LUT-9

3.2 Neighborhood/Site Enhancements 186

3.2.1 Provide Pedestrian Network Improvements 186 SDT-1

3.2.2 Provide Traffic Calming Measures 190 SDT-2

3.2.3 Implement a Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Network 194 SDT-3

3.2.4 Create Urban Non-Motorized Zones 198 SDT-4

3.2.5 Incorporate Bike Lane Street Design (on-site) 200 SDT-5

3.2.6 Provide Bike Parking in Non-Residential Projects 202 SDT-6

3.2.7 Provide Bike Parking with Multi-Unit Residential Projects 204 SDT-7

3.2.8 Provide Electric Vehicle Parking 205 SDT-8

3.2.9 Dedicate Land for Bike Trails 206 SDT-9

3.3 Parking Policy/Pricing 207

3.3.1 Limit Parking Supply 207 PDT-1

3.3.2 Unbundle Parking Costs from Property Cost 210 PDT-2

3.3.3 Implement Market Price Public Parking (On-Street) 213 PDT-3

3.3.4 Require Residential Area Parking Permits 217 PDT-4

3.4 Commute Trip Reduction Programs 218

3.4.1 Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program - Voluntary 218 TRT-1

3.4.2 Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program – Required

Implementation/Monitoring

223 TRT-2

3.4.3 Provide Ride-Sharing Programs 227 TRT-3

3.4.4 Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program 230 TRT-4

3.4.5 Provide End of Trip Facilities 234 TRT-5

3.4.6 Encourage Telecommuting and Alternative Work Schedules 236 TRT-6

3.4.7 Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing 240 TRT-7

3.4.8 Implement Preferential Parking Permit Program 244 TRT-8

3.4.9 Implement Car-Sharing Program 245 TRT-9

3.4.10 Implement a School Pool Program 250 TRT-10

3.4.11 Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle 253 TRT-11

3.4.12 Implement Bike-Sharing Programs 256 TRT-12

3.4.13 Implement School Bus Program 258 TRT-13

3.4.14 Price Workplace Parking 261 TRT-14

3.4.15 Implement Employee Parking “Cash-Out” 266 TRT-15


# Measure

#

3.5 Transit System Improvements 270

3.5.1 Provide a Bus Rapid Transit System 270 TST-1

3.5.2 Implement Transit Access Improvements 275 TST-2

3.5.3 Expand Transit Network 276 TST-3

3.5.4 Increase Transit Service Frequency/Speed 280 TST-4

3.5.5 Provide Bike Parking Near Transit 285 TST-5

3.5.6 Provide Local Shuttles 286 TST-6

3.6 Road Pricing/Management 287

3.6.1 Implement Area or Cordon Pricing 287 RPT-1

3.6.2 Improve Traffic Flow 291 RPT-2

3.6.3 Required Project Contributions to Transportation Infrastructure

Improvement Projects

297 RPT-3

3.6.4 Install Park-and-Ride Lots 298 RPT-4

3.7 Vehicles 300

3.7.1 Electrify Loading Docks and/or Require Idling-Reduction Systems 300 VT-1

3.7.2 Utilize Alternative Fueled Vehicles 304 VT-2

3.7.3 Utilize Electric or Hybrid Vehicles 309 VT-3

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-1 & D-4

MP# LU-1.5 & LU-2.1.8 LUT-1 Land Use / Location

155 LUT-1

3.0 Transportation

3.1 Land Use/Location

3.1.1 Increase Density

Range of Effectiveness: 0.8 – 30.0% vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction and therefore a 0.8 – 30.0% reduction in GHG emissions.

Measure Description:

Designing the Project with increased densities, where allowed by the General Plan and/or Zoning Ordinance reduces GHG emissions associated with traffic in several ways. Density is usually measured in terms of persons, jobs, or dwellings per unit area. Increased densities affect the distance people travel and provide greater options for the mode of travel they choose. This strategy also provides a foundation for implementation of many other strategies which would benefit from increased densities. For example, transit ridership increases with density, which justifies enhanced transit service.

The reductions in GHG emissions are quantified based on reductions to VMT. The relationship between density and VMT is described by its elasticity. According to a recent study published by Brownstone, et al. in 2009, the elasticity between density and VMT is 0.12. Default densities are based on the typical suburban densities in North America which reflects the characteristics of the ITE Trip Generation Manual data used in the baseline estimates.

Measure Applicability:

Urban and suburban context o Negligible impact in a rural context

Appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects Baseline Method:

See introduction to transportation section for a discussion of how to estimate trip rates and VMT. The CO2 emissions are calculated from VMT as follows:


Where:

VMT = vehicle miles traveled EFrunning = emission factor for running emissions

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-1 & D-4


156 LUT-1

Inputs:

The following information needs to be provided by the Project Applicant:

Number of housing units per acre or jobs per job acre Mitigation Method:

% VMT Reduction = A * B [not to exceed 30%]

Where: A = Percentage increase in housing units per acre or jobs per job acre33 = (number of housing units per acre or jobs per job acre – number of housing units per acre or jobs per job acre for typical ITE development) / (number of housing units per acre or jobs per job acre for typical ITE development) For small and medium sites (less than ½ mile in radius) the calculation of housing and jobs per acre should be performed for the development site as a whole, so that the analysis does not erroneously attribute trip reduction benefits to measures that simply shift jobs and housing within the site with no overall increase in site density. For larger sites, the analysis should address the development as several ½-mile-radius sites, so that shifts from one area to another would increase the density of the receiving area but reduce the density of the donating area, resulting in trip generation rate decreases and increases, respectively, which cancel one another. B = Elasticity of VMT with respect to density (from literature) Detail:

A: [not to exceed 500% increase] o If housing: (Number of housing units per acre – 7.6) / 7.6

(See Appendix C for detail) o If jobs: (Number of jobs per acre – 20) / 20

(See Appendix C for detail) B: 0.07 (Boarnet and Handy 2010)

Assumptions:

Data based upon the following references:

Boarnet, Marlon and Handy, Susan. 2010. “DRAFT Policy Brief on the Impacts of Residential Density Based on a Review of the Empirical Literature.” http://arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/policies.htm; Table 1.

33 This value should be checked first to see if it exceeds 500% in which case A = 500%.

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-1 & D-4


157 LUT-1

Emission Reduction Ranges and Variables:

Pollutant Category Emissions Reductions34 CO2e 1.5-30% of running PM 1.5-30% of running CO 1.5-30% of running NOx 1.5-30% of running SO2 1.5-30% of running ROG 0.9-18% of total

Discussion:

The VMT reductions for this strategy are based on changes in density versus the typical suburban residential and employment densities in North America (referred to as “ITE densities”). These densities are used as a baseline to mirror those densities reflected in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, which is the baseline method for determining VMT.

There are two separate maxima noted in the fact sheet: a cap of 500% on the allowable percentage increase of housing units or jobs per acre (variable A) and a cap of 30% on % VMT reduction. The rationale for the 500% cap is that there are diminishing returns to any change in environment. For example, it is reasonably doubtful that increasing residential density by a factor of six instead of five would produce any additional change in travel behavior. The purpose for the 30% cap is to limit the influence of any single environmental factor (such as density). This emphasizes that community designs that implement multiple land use strategies (such as density, design, diversity, etc.) will show more of a reduction than relying on improvements from a single land use factor.

Example:

Sample calculations are provided below for housing:

Low Range % VMT Reduction (8.5 housing units per acre) = (8.5 – 7.6) / 7.6 *0.07 = 0.8%

High Range % VMT Reduction (60 housing units per acre)

9.66.7

6.760

or 690% Since greater than 500%, set to 500%

= 500% x 0.07 = 0.35 or 35% Since greater than 30%, set to 30%

34 The percentage reduction reflects emission reductions from running emissions. The actual value will be less than this when starting and evaporative emissions are factored into the analysis. ROG emissions have been adjusted to reflect a ratio of 40% evaporative and 60% exhaust emissions based on a statewide EMFAC run of all vehicles.

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-1 & D-4


158 LUT-1

Sample calculations are provided below for jobs:

Low Range % VMT Reduction (25 jobs per acre) = (25 – 20) / 20 *0.12 = 3%

High Range % VMT Reduction (100 jobs per acre)

420

20100

or 400%

=400% x 0.12 = 0.48 or 48% Since greater than 30%, set to 30% Preferred Literature:

-0.07 = elasticity of VMT with respect to density Boarnet and Handy’s detailed review of existing literature highlighted three individual studies that used the best available methods for analyzing data for individual households. These studies provided the following elasticities: -0.12 - Brownstone (2009), -0.07 – Bento (2005), and -0.08 – Fang (2008). To maintain a conservative estimate of the impacts of this strategy, the lower elasticity of -0.07 is used in the calculations.

Alternative Literature:

-0.05 to -0.25 = elasticity of VMT with respect to density The TRB Special Report 298 literature suggests that doubling neighborhood density across a metropolitan area might lower household VMT by about 5 to 12 percent, and perhaps by as much as 25 percent, if coupled with higher employment concentrations, significant public transit improvements, mixed uses, and other supportive demand management measures.

Alternative Literature References:

TRB, 2009. Driving and the Built Environment, Transportation Research Board Special Report 298. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/sr/sr298.pdf . Accessed March 2010. (p. 4)

Other Literature Reviewed:

None

Transportation

MP# LU-3.3 LUT-2 Land Use / Location

159 LUT-2

3.1.2 Increase Location Efficiency

Range of Effectiveness: 10-65% vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction and therefore 10-65% reduction in GHG emissions


This measure is not intended as a separate strategy but rather a documentation of empirical data to justify the “cap” for all land use/location strategies. The location of the Project relative to the type of urban landscape such as being located in an urban area, infill, or suburban center influences the amount of VMT compared to the statewide average. This is referred to as the location of efficiency since there are synergistic benefits to these urban landscapes.

To receive the maximum reduction for this location efficiency, the project will be located in an urban area/ downtown central business district. Projects located on brownfield sites/infill areas receive a lower, but still significant VMT reduction. Finally, projects in suburban centers also receive a reduction for their efficient location. Reductions are based on the typical VMT of a specific geographic area relative to the average VMT statewide.


Urban and suburban context Negligible impact in a rural context Appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial and mixed-use projects

Baseline Method:



Where:


Inputs:

No inputs are needed. VMT reduction ranges are based on the geographic location of the project within the region.

Mitigation Method:

% VMT reduction =

Transportation


160 LUT-2

Urban: 65% (representing VMT reductions for the average urban area in California versus the statewide average VMT)

Compact Infill: 30% (representing VMT reductions for the average compact infill area in California versus the statewide average VMT)

Suburban Center: 10% (representing VMT reductions for the average suburban center in California versus the statewide average VMT)

Assumptions:


Holtzclaw, et al. 2002. “Location Efficiency: Neighborhood and Socioeconomic Characteristics Determine Auto Ownership and Use – Studies in Chicago, Los Angeles, and Chicago.” Transportation Planning and Technology, Vol. 25, pp. 1–27.


Pollutant Category Emissions Reductions35 CO2e 10-65% of running PM 10-65% of running CO 10-65% of running NOx 10-65% of running SO2 10-65% of running ROG 6-39% of total

Discussion:

Example:

N/A – no calculations needed


13-72% reduction in VMT for infill projects Preferred Literature:

Holtzclaw, et al., [1] studied relationships between auto ownership and mileage per car and neighborhood urban design and socio-economic characteristics in the Chicago, Los


Transportation


161 LUT-2

Angeles, and San Francisco metro areas. In all three regions, average annual vehicle miles traveled is a function of density, income, household size, and public transit, as well as pedestrian and bicycle orientation (to a lesser extent). The annual VMT for each neighborhood was reviewed to determine empirical VMT reduction “caps” for this report. These location-based caps represent the average and maximum reductions that would likely be expected in urban, infill, suburban center, and suburban locations.

Growing Cooler looked at 10 studies which have considered the effects of regional location on travel and emissions generated by individual developments. The studies differ in methodology and context but they tend to yield the same conclusion: infill locations generate substantially lower VMT per capita than do greenfield locations, ranging from 13 - 72% lower VMT.

Literature References:

[1] Holtzclaw, et al. 2002. “Location Efficiency: Neighborhood and Socioeconomic Characteristics Determine Auto Ownership and Use – Studies in Chicago, Los Angeles, and Chicago.” Transportation Planning and Technology, Vol. 25, pp. 1–27.

[2] Ewing, et al, 2008. Growing Cooler – The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change. Urban Land Institute. (p.88, Figure 4-30)


None

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-9 & D-4

MP# LU-2 LUT-3 Land Use / Location

162 LUT-3

3.1.3 Increase Diversity of Urban and Suburban Developments (Mixed Use)

Range of Effectiveness: 9-30% vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction and therefore 9-30% reduction in GHG emissions.


Having different types of land uses near one another can decrease VMT since trips between land use types are shorter and may be accommodated by non-auto modes of transport. For example when residential areas are in the same neighborhood as retail and office buildings, a resident does not need to travel outside of the neighborhood to meet his/her trip needs. A description of diverse uses for urban and suburban areas is provided below.

Urban:

The urban project will be predominantly characterized by properties on which various uses, such as office, commercial, institutional, and residential, are combined in a single building or on a single site in an integrated development project with functional interrelationships and a coherent physical design. The mixed-use development should encourage walking and other non-auto modes of transport from residential to office/commercial/institutional locations (and vice versa). The residential units should be within ¼-mile of parks, schools, or other civic uses. The project should minimize the need for external trips by including services/facilities for day care, banking/ATM, restaurants, vehicle refueling, and shopping.

Suburban:

The suburban project will have at least three of the following on site and/or offsite within ¼-mile: Residential Development, Retail Development, Park, Open Space, or Office. The mixed-use development should encourage walking and other non-auto modes of transport from residential to office/commercial locations (and vice versa). The project should minimize the need for external trips by including services/facilities for day care, banking/ATM, restaurants, vehicle refueling, and shopping.


Urban and suburban context Negligible impact in a rural context (unless the project is a master-planned

community) Appropriate for mixed-use projects

Baseline Method:


Transportation

CEQA# MM D-9 & D-4


163 LUT-3

CO2 = VMT x EFrunning Where:


Inputs:


Percentage of each land use type in the project (to calculate land use index)

Mitigation Method:

% VMT Reduction = Land Use * B [not to exceed 30%] Where Land Use = Percentage increase in land use index versus single use development

= (land use index – 0.15)/0.15 (see Appendix C for detail)

Land use index = -a / ln(6) (from [2])

a = ii

i aa ln6

1

ai = building floor area of land use i / total square feet of area considered

o a1 = single family residential o a2 = multifamily residential o a3 = commercial o a4 = industrial o a5 = institutional o a6 = park

if land use is not present and ai is equal to 0, set ai equal to 0.01

B = elasticity of VMT with respect to land use index (0.09 from [1])

not to exceed 500% increase

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-9 & D-4


164 LUT-3

Assumptions:


[1] Ewing, R., and Cervero, R., "Travel and the Built Environment - A Meta-Analysis." Journal of the American Planning Association, <to be published> (2010). Table 4.

[2] Song, Y., and Knaap, G., “Measuring the effects of mixed land uses on housing values.” Regional Science and Urban Economics 34 (2004) 663-680. (p. 669) http://urban.csuohio.edu/~sugie/papers/RSUE/RSUE2005_Measuring%20the%20effects%20of%20mixed%20land%20use.pdf


Pollutant Category Emissions Reductions36 CO2e 9-30% of running PM 9-30% of running CO 9-30% of running NOx 9-30% of running SO2 9-30% of running ROG 5.4-18% of total

Discussion:

In the above calculation, a land use index of 0.15 is used as a baseline representing a development with a single land use (see Appendix C for calculations).

There are two separate maxima noted in the fact sheet: a cap of 500% on the allowable percentage increase of land use index (variable A) and a cap of 30% on % VMT reduction. The rationale for the 500% cap is that there are diminishing returns to any change in environment. For example, it is reasonably doubtful that increasing the land use index by a factor of six instead of five would produce any additional change in travel behavior. The purpose for the 30% cap is to limit the influence of any single environmental factor (such as diversity). This emphasizes that community designs that implement multiple land use strategies (such as density, design, diversity, etc.) will show more of a reduction than relying on improvements from a single land use factor.


Transportation

CEQA# MM D-9 & D-4


165 LUT-3

Example:

Sample calculations are provided below:

90% single family homes, 10% commercial o Land use index = -[0.9*ln(0.9)+ 0.1*ln(0.1)+ 4*0.01*ln(0.01)] / ln(6) =

0.3 o Low Range % VMT Reduction = (0.3 – 0.15)/0.15 *0.09 = 9%

1/6 single family, 1/6 multi-family, 1/6 commercial, 1/6 industrial, 1/6 institutional, 1/6 parks

o Land use index = -[6*0.17*ln(0.17)] / ln(6) = 1 o High Range % VMT Reduction (land use index = 1) o Land use = (1-0.15)/0.15 = 5.6 or 566%. Since this is greater than

500%, set to 500%. o % VMT Reduction = (5 x 0.09) = 0.45 or 45%. Since this is greater

than 30%, set to 30%. Preferred Literature:

-0.09 = elasticity of VMT with respect to land use index The land use (or entropy) index measurement looks at the mix of land uses of a development. An index of 0 indicates a single land use while 1 indicates a full mix of uses. Ewing’s [1] synthesis looked at a total of 10 studies, where none controlled for self-selection37. The weighted average elasticity of VMT with respect to the land use mix index is -0.09. The methodology for calculating the land use index is described in Song and Knaap [2].


Vehicle trip reduction = [1 - (ABS(1.5*h-e) / (1.5*h+e)) - 0.25] / 0.25*0.03 Where : h = study area housing units, and e = study area employment. Nelson\Nygaard’s report [3] describes a calculation adapted from Criterion and Fehr & Peers [4]. The formula assumes an “ideal” housing balance of 1.5 jobs per household and a baseline diversity of 0.25. The maximum trip reduction with this method is 9%.

37 Self selection occurs when residents or employers that favor travel by non-auto modes choose locations where this type of travel is possible. They are therefore more inclined to take advantage of the available options than a typical resident or employee might otherwise be.

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-9 & D-4


166 LUT-3


[3] Nelson\Nygaard, 2005. Crediting Low-Traffic Developments (p.12). http://www.montgomeryplanning.org/transportation/documents/TripGenerationAnalysisUsingURBEMIS.pdf

[4] Criteron Planner/Engineers and Fehr & Peers Associates (2001). Index 4D Method. A Quick-Response Method of Estimating Travel Impacts from Land-Use Changes. Technical Memorandum prepared for US EPA, October 2001.


None

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-3

MP# LU-2.1.4 LUT-4 Land Use / Location

167 LUT-4

3.1.4 Increase Destination Accessibility

Range of Effectiveness: 6.7 – 20% vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction and therefore 6.7-20% reduction in GHG emissions.


The project will be located in an area with high accessibility to destinations. Destination accessibility is measured in terms of the number of jobs or other attractions reachable within a given travel time, which tends to be highest at central locations and lowest at peripheral ones. The location of the project also increases the potential for pedestrians to walk and bike to these destinations and therefore reduces the VMT.


Urban and suburban context Negligible impact in a rural context Appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial and mixed-use projects

Baseline Method:



Where:


Inputs:


Distance to downtown or major job center Mitigation Method:

% VMT Reduction = Center Distance * B [not to exceed 30%] Where

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-3


168 LUT-4

Center Distance = Percentage decrease in distance to downtown or major job center versus typical ITE suburban development = (distance to downtown/job center for typical ITE development – distance to downtown/job center for project) / (distance to downtown/job center for typical ITE development) Center Distance = 12 - Distance to downtown/job center for project) / 12

See Appendix C for detail B = Elasticity of VMT with respect to distance to downtown or major job center (0.20 from [1]) Assumptions:




Pollutant Category Emissions Reductions38 CO2e 6.7 – 20% of running PM 6.7 – 20% of running CO 6.7 – 20% of running NOx 6.7 – 20% of running SO2 6.7 – 20% of running ROG 4 – 12% of total

Discussion:

The VMT reductions for this strategy are based on changes in distance to key destinations versus the standard suburban distance in North America. This distance is used as a baseline to mirror the distance to destinations reflected in the land uses for the ITE Trip Generation Manual, which is the baseline method for determining VMT.

The purpose for the 30% cap on % VMT reduction is to limit the influence of any single environmental factor (such as destination accessibility). This emphasizes that community designs that implement multiple land use strategies (such as density,


Transportation

CEQA# MM D-3


169 LUT-4

design, diversity, destination, etc.) will show more of a reduction than relying on improvements from a single land use factor.

Example:

Sample calculations are provided below:

Low Range % VMT Reduction (8 miles to downtown/job center) =

6.7%0.2012

812

High Range % VMT Reduction (0.1 miles to downtown/job center) =

20.0%0.2012

0.112

Preferred Literature:

-0.20 = elasticity of VMT with respect to job accessibility by auto -0.20 = elasticity of VMT with respect to distance to downtown

The Ewing and Cervero report [1] finds that VMT is strongly related to measures of accessibility to destinations. The weighted average elasticity of VMT with respect to job accessibility by auto is -0.20 (looking at five total studies). The weighted average elasticity of VMT with respect to distance to downtown is -0.22 (looking at four total studies, of which one controls for self selection39).


10-30% reduction in vehicle trips The VTPI literature [2] suggests a 10-30% reduction in vehicle trips for “smart growth” development practices that result in more compact, accessible, multi-modal communities where travel distances are shorter, people have more travel options, and it is possible to walk and bicycle more.


[2] Litman, T., 2009. “Win-Win Emission Reduction Strategies.” Victoria Transport Policy Institute (VTPI). Website: http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf. Accessed March 2010. (p. 7, Table 3)

39 Self selection occurs when residents or employers that favor travel by non-auto modes choose locations where this type of travel is possible. They are therefore more inclined to take advantage of the available options than a typical resident or employee might otherwise be.

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-3


170 LUT-4


None

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-2

MP# LU-1,LU-4 LUT-5 Land Use / Location

171 LUT-5

3.1.5 Increase Transit Accessibility

Range of Effectiveness: 0.5 – 24.6% VMT reduction and therefore 0.5-24.6% reduction in GHG emissions.40


Locating a project with high density near transit will facilitate the use of transit by people traveling to or from the Project site. The use of transit results in a mode shift and therefore reduced VMT. A project with a residential/commercial center designed around a rail or bus station, is called a transit-oriented development (TOD). The project description should include, at a minimum, the following design features:

A transit station/stop with high-quality, high-frequency bus service located within a 5-10 minute walk (or roughly ¼ mile from stop to edge of development), and/or

o A rail station located within a 20 minute walk (or roughly ½ mile from station to edge of development)

Fast, frequent, and reliable transit service connecting to a high percentage of regional destinations

Neighborhood designed for walking and cycling In addition to the features listed above, the following strategies may also be implemented to provide an added benefit beyond what is documented in the literature:

Mixed use development [LUT-3] Traffic calmed streets with good connectivity [SDT-2] Parking management strategies such as unbundled parking, maximum parking

requirements, market pricing implemented to reduce amount of land dedicated to vehicle parking [see PPT-1 through PPT-7]


Urban and suburban context Appropriate in a rural context if development site is adjacent to a commuter rail

station with convenient rail service to a major employment center Appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects

Baseline Method:

40 Transit vehicles may also result in increases in emissions that are associated with electricity production or fuel use. The Project Applicant should consider these potential additional emissions when estimating mitigation for these measures.

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-2


172 LUT-5



Where:


Inputs:


Distance to transit station in project Mitigation Method:

% VMT = Transit * B [not to exceed 30%] Where Transit = Increase in transit mode share = % transit mode share for project - % transit mode share for typical ITE development (1.3% as described in Appendix C) % transit mode share for project (see Table)

Distance to transit Transit mode share calculation equation (where x = distance of project to transit)

0 – 0.5 miles -50*x + 38 0.5 to 3 miles -4.4*x + 15.2 > 3 miles no impact Source: Lund et al, 2004; Fehr & Peers 2010 (see Appendix C for calculation detail)

B = adjustments from transit ridership increase to VMT (0.67, see Appendix C for detail)

Assumptions:

Data based upon the following references: [1] Lund, H. and R. Cervero, and R. Willson (2004). Travel Characteristics of Transit-Oriented Development in California. (p. 79, Table 5-25)

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-2


173 LUT-5


Pollutant Category Emissions Reductions41 CO2e 0.5 – 24.6% of running PM 0.5 – 24.6% of running CO 0.5 – 24.6% of running NOx 0.5 – 24.6% of running SO2 0.5 – 24.6% of running

ROG 0.3 – 14.8% of total

Discussion:

The purpose for the 30% cap on % VMT reduction is to limit the influence of any single environmental factor (such as transit accessibility). This emphasizes that community designs that implement multiple land use strategies (such as density, design, diversity, transit accessibility, etc.) will show more of a reduction than relying on improvements from a single land use factor.

Example:

Sample calculations are provided below for a rail station:

Low Range % VMT Reduction (3 miles from station) = [(-4.4*3+15.2) – 1.3%] * 0.67 = 0.5%

High Range % VMT Reduction (0 miles from station) = [(-50*0+38) – 1.3%] * 0.67 = 24.6%


13 to 38% transit mode share (residents in TODs with ½ mile of rail station) 5 to 13% transit mode share (residents in TODs from ½ mile to 3 miles of rail

station) The Travel Characteristics report [1] surveyed TODs and surrounding areas in San Diego, Los Angeles, San Jose, Sacramento, and Bay Area regions. Survey sites are all located in non-central business district locations, are within walking distance of a transit station with rail service headways of 15 minutes or less, and were intentionally developed as TODs.


Transportation

CEQA# MM D-2


174 LUT-5


Alternate:

-0.05 = elasticity of VMT with respect to distance to nearest transit stop Ewing and Cervero’s meta-analysis [2] provides this weighted average elasticity based on six total studies, of which one controls for self-selection. The report does not provide the range of distances where this elasticity is valid.

Alternate:

5.9 – 13.3% reduction in VMT The Bailey, et al. 2008 report [3] predicted a reduction of household daily VMT of 5.8 miles for a location next to a rail station and 2.6 miles for a location next to a bus station. Using the report’s estimate of 43.75 daily average miles driven, the estimated reduction in VMT for rail accessibility is 13.3% (5.8/43.75) and for bus accessibility is 5.9% (2.6/43.75).

Alternate:

15% reduction in vehicle trips 2 to 5 times higher transit mode share

TCRP Report 128 [4] concludes that transit-oriented developments, compared to typical developments represented by the ITE Trip Generation Manual, have 47% lower vehicle trip rates and have 2 to 5 times higher transit mode share. TCRP Report 128 notes that the ITE Trip Generation Manual shows 6.67 daily trips per unit while detailed counts of 17 residential TODs resulted in 3.55 trips per unit (a 47% reduction in vehicle trips). This study looks at mid-rise and high-rise apartments at the residential TOD sites. A more conservative comparison would be to look at the ITE Trip Generation Manual rates for high-rise apartments, 4.2 trips per unit. This results in a 15% reduction in vehicle trips.



[3] Bailey, L., Mokhtarian, P.L., & Little, A. (2008). “The Broader Connection between Public Transportation, Energy Conservation and Greenhouse Gas Reduction.” ICF International. (Table 4 and 5)

[4] TCRP, 2008. TCRP Report 128 - Effects of TOD on Housing, Parking, and Travel. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_128.pdf (p. 11, 69).

Transportation

CEQA# MM D-2


175 LUT-5


None

Transportation

CEQA# MM-T-6 MP# LU-4 SDT-1 Neighborhood / Site

Enhancement

186 SDT-1

3.2 Neighborhood/Site Enhancements

3.2.1 Provide Pedestrian Network Improvements

Range of Effectiveness: 0 - 2% vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction and therefore 0 - 2% reduction in GHG emissions.


Providing a pedestrian access network to link areas of the Project site encourages people to walk instead of drive. This mode shift results in people driving less and thus a reduction in VMT. The project will provide a pedestrian access network that internally links all uses and connects to all existing or planned external streets and pedestrian facilities contiguous with the project site. The project will minimize barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. Physical barriers such as walls, landscaping, and slopes that impede pedestrian circulation will be eliminated.


Urban, suburban, and rural context Appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial and mixed-use projects Reduction benefit only occurs if the project has both pedestrian network

improvements on site and connections to the larger off-site network. Baseline Method:



Where:


Inputs:

The project applicant must provide information regarding pedestrian access and connectivity within the project and to/from off-site destinations.

Transportation


Enhancement

187 SDT-1

Mitigation Method:

Estimated VMT Reduction Extent of Pedestrian Accommodations Context

2% Within Project Site and Connecting Off-Site Urban/Suburban 1% Within Project Site Urban/Suburban

< 1% Within Project Site and Connecting Off-Site Rural Assumptions:


Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) Transportation Emission Guidebook. http://www.ccap.org/safe/guidebook/guide_complete.html (accessed March 2010)

1000 Friends of Oregon (1997) “Making the Connections: A Summary of the LUTRAQ Project” (p. 16): http://www.onethousandfriendsoforegon.org/resources/lut_vol7.html


Pollutant Category Emissions Reductions45 CO2e 0 - 2% of running PM 0 - 2% of running CO 0 - 2% of running NOx 0 - 2% of running SO2 0 - 2% of running ROG 0 – 1.2% of total

Discussion:

As detailed in the preferred literature section below, the lower range of 1 – 2% VMT reduction was pulled from the literature to provide a conservative estimate of reduction potential. The literature does not speak directly to a rural context, but an assumption was made that the benefits will likely be lower than a suburban/urban context.

Example:

N/A – calculations are not needed.



Transportation


Enhancement

188 SDT-1

1 - 2% reduction in VMT

The Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) attributes a 1% reduction in VMT from pedestrian-oriented design assuming this creates a 5% decrease in automobile mode share (e.g. auto split shifts from 95% to 90%). This mode split is based on the Portland Regional Land Use Transportation and Air Quality (LUTRAQ) project. The LUTRAQ analysis also provides the high end of 10% reduction in VMT. This 10% assumes the following features:

Compact, mixed-use communities Interconnected street network Narrower roadways and shorter block lengths Sidewalks Accessibility to transit and transit shelters Traffic calming measures and street trees Parks and public spaces

Other strategies (development density, diversity, design, transit accessibility, traffic calming) are intended to account for the effects of many of the measures in the above list. Therefore, the assumed effectiveness of the Pedestrian Network measure should utilize the lower end of the 1 - 10% reduction range. If the pedestrian improvements are being combined with a significant number of the companion strategies, trip reductions for those strategies should be applied as well, based on the values given specifically for those strategies in other sections of this report. Based upon these findings, and drawing upon recommendations presented in the alternate literature below, the recommended VMT reduction attributable to pedestrian network improvements, above and beyond the benefits of other measures in the above bullet list, should be 1% for comprehensive pedestrian accommodations within the development plan or project itself, or 2% for comprehensive internal accommodations and external accommodations connecting to off-site destinations.


Alternate:

Walking is three times more common with enhanced pedestrian infrastructure 58% increase in non-auto mode share for work trips

Transportation


Enhancement

189 SDT-1

The Nelson\Nygaard [1] report for the City of Santa Monica Land Use and Circulation Element EIR summarized studies looking at pedestrian environments. These studies have found a direct connection between non-auto forms of travel and a high quality pedestrian environment. Walking is three times more common with communities that have pedestrian friendly streets compared to less pedestrian friendly communities. Non-auto mode share for work trips is 49% in a pedestrian friendly community, compared to 31% in an auto-oriented community. Non-auto mode share for non-work trips is 15%, compared to 4% in an auto-oriented community. However, these effects also depend upon other aspects of the pedestrian friendliness being present, which are accounted for separately in this report through land use strategy mitigation measures such as density and urban design.

Alternate:

0.5% - 2.0% reduction in VMT The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) Recommended Guidance for Land Use Emission Reductions [2] attributes 1% reduction for a project connecting to existing external streets and pedestrian facilities. A 0.5% reduction is attributed to connecting to planned external streets and pedestrian facilities (which must be included in a pedestrian master plan or equivalent). Minimizing pedestrian barriers attribute an additional 1% reduction in VMT. These recommendations are generally in line with the recommended discounts derived from the preferred literature above.

Preferred and Alternative Literature Notes:

[1] Nelson\Nygaard, 2010. City of Santa Monica Land Use and Circulation Element EIR Report, Appendix – Santa Monica Luce Trip Reduction Impacts Analysis (p.401). http://www.shapethefuture2025.net/

Nelson\Nygaard looked at the following studies: Anne Vernez Moudon, Paul Hess, Mary Catherine Snyder and Kiril Stanilov (2003), Effects of Site Design on Pedestrian Travel in Mixed Use, Medium-Density Environments, http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/research/reports/fullreports/432.1.pdf; Robert Cervero and Carolyn Radisch (1995), Travel Choices in Pedestrian Versus Automobile Oriented Neighborhoods, http://www.uctc.net/papers/281.pdf;

[2] Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) Recommended Guidance for Land Use Emission Reductions. (p. 11) http://www.airquality.org/ceqa/GuidanceLUEmissionReductions.pdf


None

B‐2. Health Risk Assessment Report

HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT TECHNICAL REPORT

FortheProposed

PalladiumResidences6201WestSunsetBoulevardand6210WestSelmaAvenue

LosAngeles,CA90028

Preparedfor:

CITY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING 201NFigueroaStreet#4LosAngeles,CA90012

Preparedby:

PCRSERVICESCORPORATION201SantaMonicaBoulevard,Suite500

SantaMonica,CA90401TEL310.451.4488FAX310.451.5279

October2015

PalladiumResidences HealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportPCRServicesCorporation i

Table of Contents

Page

EXECUTIVESUMMARY.....................................................................................................................................................ES‐1

1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................................1 1.1 ProjectDescription...............................................................................................................................................................1 1.2 ExistingAirQualityConditions.......................................................................................................................................1

2.0 REGULATIONSANDSIGNIFICANCETHRESHOLDS.........................................................................................5 2.1 RegulatorySetting................................................................................................................................................................5

3.0 METHODOLOGY.........................................................................................................................................................7 3.1 HealthRiskAnalysisintheDraftEIR...........................................................................................................................7 3.1 SourceIdentification...........................................................................................................................................................7

3.1.1Construction......................................................................................................................................................................7 3.1.2Operations..........................................................................................................................................................................8

3.2 EmissionsCalculations.......................................................................................................................................................8 3.2.1Construction......................................................................................................................................................................8 3.2.2Operations.......................................................................................................................................................................12

3.3 DispersionModeling.........................................................................................................................................................12 3.3.1Construction...................................................................................................................................................................13 3.3.2Operations.......................................................................................................................................................................13

3.4 CancerRiskandHealthRiskCalculations...............................................................................................................14

4.0 IMPACTANALYSIS..................................................................................................................................................19

5.0 SUMMARYOFRESULTS........................................................................................................................................21

APPENDICES

APPENDIXA:HEALTHRISKASSESSMENTWORKSHEETSANDOUTPUTFILES

List of Figures

Figure Page

ES‐1 VicinityLocationMap..................................................................................................................................................ES‐3 1 ProjectSiteandSurroundingLandUses....................................................................................................................3 2 ConstructionSource‐ReceptorDiagram..................................................................................................................15 3 OperationsSource‐ReceptorDiagram......................................................................................................................16

List of Tables

Table Page

ES‐1 MaximumCancerRiskImpactforOff‐siteSensitiveReceptors.................................................................ES‐2 1 ConstructionEquipmentComparisonbetweentheDEIRandCurrentAnalysis....................................10 2 ConstructionAssumptionComparisonbetweentheDEIRandCurrentAnalysis..................................12 3 OEHHARecommendedResidentialDailyBreathingRatesforPointEstimateDose

Calculations(L/kgbodyweight)..............................................................................................................................17 4 OEHHARecommendationsforFractionofTimeatHome(FAH)forEvaluatingResidential

CancerRisk..........................................................................................................................................................................18 5 SummaryofCarcinogenicRisksforOff‐siteSensitiveReceptors.................................................................19

PalladiumResidences HealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportPCRServicesCorporation

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Acronym Description

Basin SouthCoastAirBasin

CARB CaliforniaAirResourcesBoard

CEQA CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct

City CityofLosAngeles

CPF CancerPotencyFactor

DPM dieselexhaustparticulatematter

HARP HotspotsAnalysisandReportingProgram

HRA HealthRiskAssessment

MATESIV MultipleAirToxicsExposureStudy,May2015

SCAQMD SouthCoastAirQualityManagementDistrictTAC toxicaircontaminants

USEPA UnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency

t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

PalladiumResidences HealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportPCRServicesCorporation ES‐1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this Health Risk Assessment Technical Report is to assess and discuss the impacts ofpotential construction related toxic air contaminants (TACs) that may impact off‐site residents in closeproximitytothePalladiumResidences(theProject).CHPalladium,LLC,theApplicant,proposesamixed‐usedevelopmentona3.6‐acreparcellocatedat6201WestSunsetBoulevardand6210WestSelmaAvenue(theProjectSiteorSite)intheHollywoodcommunityoftheCityofLosAngeles(theCity).

TheProjectSiteshowninFigureES‐1,VicinityLocationMap,islocatedintheHollywoodcommunityoftheCity of Los Angeles. The Project would add two new buildings to the Project Site, replacing the surfaceparkinglotsonthenortheastandsouthwestportionsoftheProjectSite.TheProjectincludesexcavationforsubterraneanparking,andconstructionofbuildings.

InMarch2015,astheFinalEIRwasbeingpreparedforpublicationOEHHAadoptednewguidelineswhichupdatedthepreviousguidanceforpreparingHealthRiskAssessments(HRAs)undertheState’sAirToxics“Hot Spots” Program Risk Assessment program by incorporating advances in risk assessment withconsideration of infants and children using Age Sensitivity Factors (ASF). These changes also take intoaccount different breathing rates and time spent at home. On June 5, 2015, SCAQMD incorporated theupdatedOEHHAguidelinesintoitsapplicablerulesthatapplytocertainstationarysourcesregulatedundertheHot Spots program. The SCAQMDhas not yet released guidance on the applicability of the updatedOEHHA guidelines for preparing CEQA documents. Nonetheless, even though SCAQMD has notrecommended using the update OEHHA guidelines for preparing HRAs in CEQA documents, to beconservative, ananalysiswasperformedusing theseguidelines. Newanalyseswereperformedusing thenewOEHHAguidelinestoaddressboththeconstructionimpactsthatwerepreviouslyanalyzedqualitativelyandalsotheoperationsimpacts,previouslyquantifiedinaccordancewith2003OEHHAguidance.

TheHealthRiskAssessmentincludesthreeseparatecomponents: (1)Emissionsinventory;(2)DispersionModeling;and(3)HealthRiskCalculations. Emissions fromtheconstructionandoperationof theProjectwerecalculatedusingtheCaliforniaEmissionsEstimatorModel(CalEEMod)andemissionfactorsfromtheCalifornia Air Resources Board (CARB) EMFACmodel. Dispersionmodelingwas performedusing theUSEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(USEPA)AERMODmodelwithmeteorologicaldatafromtheclosestSouthCoastAirQualityManagementDistrict(SCAQMD)monitoringstation.Sensitivereceptorsusedformodelingwereplacedatthelocationofexistingandfuturepotentialresidentialbuildingswithin500feetoftheSite.HealthriskcalculationswereperformedusingtheCARBHotspotsAnalysisandReportingProgram(HARP),version2spreadsheetmethodology.

Asshown inTableES‐1,MaximumCancerRiskImpactforOff‐siteSensitiveReceptors, below, cancer riskatthe maximum impacted receptor was below the SCAQMD significance threshold of 10 in one million.Therefore, impacts to off‐site receptors were less than significant and no mitigation measures werenecessary.

Executive Summary November 2015


Table ES‐1

Maximum Cancer Risk Impact for Off‐site Sensitive Receptors

Risk Scenario Carcinogenic Risk Per One Million*

Construction:MaximumExposedIndividual(MEI) 6.5Operations:MaximumExposedIndividual(MEI) 2.0SCAQMDSignificanceThreshold 10ExceedThreshold? No

Source: PCR Services Corporation, 2015.

£¤101

N El

Centr

o Ave

FIGURE

Source: ESRI Street Map, 2009; PCR Services Corporation, 2014.

0 0.125 0.25 Miles

Palladium Residences

Regional and Vicinity Location MapoES-1

^PROJECT SITE

Project Boundary

Executive Summary November 2015



PalladiumResidences HealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportPCRServicesCorporation 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

TheProjectSiteisimmediatelyborderedbySunsetBoulevardtothesouth,ArgyleAvenuetothewest,SelmaAvenuetothenorth,andNorthElCentroAvenuetotheeast,asshownintheaerialphotographpresentedinFigure 1, ProjectSiteandSurroundingLandUses. The northwest corner of the block is under differentownershipandisnotapartoftheProjectSite.Landusesinthenorthwestcornerareprimarilycommercial.Landusestothenorth,acrossSelmaAvenue,includeaTraderJoe’sgrocerystore,the1600Vinemulti‐familyresidential building, the W Hollywood Hotel, The Argyle nightclub and cocktail lounge, and the RicardoMontalbanTheater. Landuses to the south, acrossSunsetBoulevard, consistof retail stores, restaurants,Nickelodeonstudios,andacarwash. Landuses to theeastandwestacrossElCentroAvenueandArgyleAvenue,respectively,arepredominantlycommercialwithsomefuturemulti‐familyresidentialdevelopment.

TheProjectSiteisgenerallyflat,withagentleslopetothesouthandanaverageelevationofapproximatelyfeet abovemean sea level. TheProject Site currently contains theHollywoodPalladium in the southeastquadrantoftheSiteandassociatedsurfaceparkinginthesouthwestandnortheastquadrants.TheparkinglotisaccessedviatwodrivewaysonArgyleAvenueandElCentroAvenue.

The Project, as described in the Draft EIR, included two development options to provide flexibility forchangingmarketconditions. UnderOption1,Residential, theProjectwouldcontainup to731residentialunits.UnderOption2,Residential/Hotel,theProjectwouldhaveprovidedupto598residentialunitsanda250 room hotelwith related hotel facilities such as banquet andmeeting area. Under both Options, theProject’stwonewbuildingswouldbeupto28storiesandapproximately350feetinheight,asdefinedbytheLosAngelesMunicipalCode, andwouldbe constructedwith the same structural configurations, includingthe same massing of above‐ground and below‐ground structures. Both Options would also includeapproximately24,000squarefeetofstreetlevelretailandrestaurantuses,includingactivationofcurrentlyvacant retail space in the Palladium building along Sunset Boulevard. Parking would be located in asubterraneanstructureaswellas inanabove‐gradestructurealong thenorthernedgeof theProjectSite.TheApplicantisnolongerproposingthedevelopmentofOption2.

1.2 EXISTING AIR QUALITY CONDITIONS

TheSCAQMDhasreleasedadraftfinalBasin‐wideairtoxicsstudy(MATESIV,MultipleAirToxicsExposureStudy,May2015). TheMATESIVStudyrepresentsoneof themostcomprehensiveair toxicsstudieseverconducted in an urban environment. The Study was aimed at estimating the cancer risk from toxic aircontaminant(TAC)emissionsthroughouttheBasinbyconductingacomprehensivemonitoringprogram,anupdatedemissionsinventoryofTACs,andamodelingefforttofullycharacterizehealthrisksforthoselivingin the Basin. The Study concluded that the average carcinogenic risk from air pollution in the Basin isapproximately420inonemillion.Mobilesources(e.g.,cars,trucks,trains,ships,aircraft,etc.)representthegreatest contributors. Approximately 75 percent of the risk is attributed to diesel particulate emissions,approximately20percenttoothertoxicsassociatedwithmobilesources(includingbenzene,butadiene,andformaldehyde), and approximately 5 percent of all carcinogenic risk is attributed to stationary sources(whichincludeindustriesandothercertainbusinesses,suchasdrycleanersandchromeplatingoperations).

1.0 Introduction November 2015


As part of theMATES IV study, the SCAQMDhas prepared a series ofmaps that show regional trends inestimatedoutdoorinhalationcancerriskfromtoxicemissions,aspartofanongoingefforttoprovideinsightinto relative risks. The maps’ estimates represent the number of potential cancers per million peopleassociatedwitha lifetimeofbreathingair toxics (24hoursperdayoutdoors for70years) inpartsof thearea.TheMATESIVwebinteractivemapisthemostrecentlyavailablemaptorepresentexistingconditionsneartheProjectarea. Theestimatedcancerriskisapproximately469cancerspermillion.1Generally,theriskfromairtoxicsislowernearthecoastline;increasinginland,withhigherrisksconcentratednearlargedieselsources(e.g.,freeways,airports,andports).

1 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study Iv – Model Estimated Cancer Risk, (2015),

http://www3.aqmd.gov/webappl/OI.Web/OI.aspx?jurisdictionID=AQMD.gov&shareID=73f55d6b‐82cc‐4c41‐b779‐4c48c9a8b15b.AccessedOctober12,2015.

£¤101

Selma Avenue

N El C

entro

Aven

ue

Sunset Boulevard

Argy

le Av

enue

Hollywood Boulevard

Vine S

treet N G

ower

Stree

t

De Longpre Avenue

Yucca StreetIva

r Ave

nue

HollywoodPalladium

CapitalRecords

PantagesTheatre

W. Hoteland

Residences

Mixed Use Residential and

Commercial

Sunset & Vine Mixed Use

Commercial and

Residential

Low/Medium Density Residential

Sunset & Vine Tower

CBSColumbia

Square

NickelodeonStudio

Low/Medium Density

Residential

Commercial

Sunset Gower Studios

Arclight Cinemas/Cinerama Dome

Sunset Media Tower

Office and Commercial

HollywoodCommunity

Hospital

Low/Medium Density

Residential

Residential and Commercial

LA Fitness

Selma Avenue

Harold Way

La B

aig Av

enue

CommercialLA FilmSchool

Columbia Square(under

construction)

BLVD 6200(under

construction)

Commercial

Commercial ParkingStructure

Selma and Vine Mixed Use

(under construction)

FIGURE

Source: ESRI, 2010; PCR Services Corporation, 2014.

0 400 800 Feet


Project Site andSurrounding Land Useso 1

Project Boundary

Selma Avenue Area

Sunset Boulevard Area

1.0 Introduction November 2015




2.0 REGULATIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS

2.1 REGULATORY SETTING

Certainairpollutantshavebeenrecognizedtocausenotablehealthproblemsandconsequentialdamagetothe environment either directly or in reaction with other pollutants, due to their presence in elevatedconcentrationsintheatmosphere.Suchpollutantshavebeenidentifiedandregulatedaspartoftheoverallendeavor to prevent further deterioration and facilitate improvement in air quality. The SCAQMDperiodicallyassesseslevelsofTACsintheAirBasin.ATACisdefinedbyCaliforniaHealthandSafetyCodeSection39655:

“Toxicaircontaminant”meansanairpollutantwhichmaycauseorcontributetoanincreaseinmortalityorinseriousillness,orwhichmayposeapresentorpotentialhazardtohumanhealth.Asubstancethatislistedasahazardousairpollutantpursuanttosubsection(b)ofSection112ofthefederalact(42U.S.C.Sec.7412(b))isatoxicaircontaminant.

TACsrefertoadiversegroupofairpollutantsthatarecapableofcausingchronic(i.e.,oflongduration)andacute (i.e., severe but of shortduration) adverse effects onhumanhealth. TACs includeboth organic andinorganic chemical substances thatmay be emitted from a variety of common sources including gasolinestations,motorvehicles,drycleaners,industrialoperations,paintingoperations,andresearchandteachingfacilities.TACsaredifferent than “criteria”pollutants in that ambient airquality standardshavenotbeenestablishedforTACs,largelybecausetherearehundredsofairtoxics,andtheireffectsonhealthtendtobefeltonalocalscaleratherthanonaregionalbasis.

In 1998, The California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) identified diesel exhaust particulatematter(DPM)asaTACbasedonitspotentialtocausecancer,prematuredeath,andotherhealthproblems.The greatest potential for TAC emissions during construction is related to diesel particulate matteremissionsassociatedwithheavy‐dutyequipment.Duringlong‐termoperations,sourcesofDPMmayincludeheavydutydieseltrucksandstationaryemergencygenerators.

The Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is responsible for developing andrevisingguidelinesforperforminghealthriskassessments(HRAs)undertheState’stheAirToxicsHotSpotsProgram Risk Assessment (AB2588) regulation. In March 2015, OEHHA adopted new guidelines whichupdates thepreviousguidanceby incorporatingadvances inriskassessmentwithconsiderationof infantsandchildrenusingAgeSensitivityFactors(ASF). Thesechangesalsotakeintoaccountdifferentbreathingratesandtimespentathome. Childrenhaveahigherbreathingratecomparedtoadultsandwould likelyspendmoretimeathomeresulting in longerexposuredurations. OnJune5,2015,SCAQMDincorporatedtheseguidelinesintorelevantrulesapplicabletopermittingofstationarysources.2TheSCAQMDhasnotyetreleasedguidanceontheapplicabilityoftheupdatedOEHHAguidelinesforpreparingCEQAdocuments.

TheCityofLosAngelesCEQAThresholdsGuideandtheSCAQMDhasestablishedthatasignificant impactwouldoccuriftheprojectwouldexposesensitivereceptorstoTACsresultinginanincrementalcancerriskimpactgreaterorequalto10inonemillion.

2 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Minutes of the June 5, 2015 Meeting, http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default‐

source/Agendas/Governing‐Board/2015/2015‐Jul10‐001.pdf?sfvrsn=8,AccessedSeptember28,2015

2.0 Regulations and Significance Thresholds November 2015




3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 HEALTH RISK ANALYSIS IN THE DRAFT EIR

As discussed previously, construction health risk impacts in the DEIR were addressed qualitatively,consistentwithSCAQMDCEQAguidelinesatthetimeofEIRpreparation.TheDEIRwasmadeavailableforpublicreviewinOctober2014,withthereviewperiodendingDecember2014.

Asindicatedabove,OEHHAadoptednewriskassessmentguidelinesinMarch2015.InJune2015,SCAQMDhas incorporated these guidelines into rules that apply to stationary sources. The SCAQMD has not yetreleased guidance on the applicability of the updated OEHHA guidelines for preparing CEQA documents.Nonetheless,eventhoughSCAQMDhasnotrecommendedusingtheupdateOEHHAguidelinesforpreparingHRAs in CEQA documents, to be conservative, an analysis was performed using these guidelines. Newanalyseswereperformedusing thenewOEHHAguidelines to addressboth the construction impacts thatwerepreviouslyanalyzedqualitativelyandalsotheoperationsimpacts,previouslyquantifiedinaccordancewith2003OEHHAguidance.

Healthriskanalysesconsistofseveralcomponentstoassesshealthimpactstonearbysensitive(residential)uses including an emissions inventory, dispersion modeling, and health risk calculations. Duringconstruction activities, diesel particulate matter emitted from heavy equipment and trucks would beanalyzed for impacts to human health. During operational activities, emissions from charbroilers,maintenanceandtestingoftwoon‐siteemergencygenerators,andon‐siteidlingofmedium‐andheavy‐dutytrucksandtransportationrefrigerationunits(TRUs)wouldbeanalyzed.

Project‐related construction DPM emissions were calculated for on‐site equipment usage and haul trucktrafficduringconstructionactivities. Operationalemissionswerecalculated forcharbroilers,maintenanceandtestingoftwoon‐siteemergencygenerators,andon‐siteidlingofmedium‐andheavy‐dutytrucksandTRUs. Dispersion modeling was performed to determine pollutant concentrations at nearby off‐sitesensitivereceptors.HealthimpactswerecalculatedusingriskfactorsobtainedfromOEHHA.Thefollowingsection discusses the analysis of project‐related construction and operational health risk based on therevisedOEHHAguidelines.TherevisedanalysiswouldbebasedonthesameassumptionsusedintheDEIR.

3.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION

3.1.1 Construction

Due to the short‐term nature of construction activities (3 years), health risk impacts were analyzedqualitativelyintheDEIR.However,intheairqualitysectionoftheDEIR,criteriapollutantemissionswerecalculatedforvariousproject‐relatedconstructionactivitiesandlocations. Thesesourcesofairpollutantsincludeheavyequipmentusage(bulldozers,backhoes,tractors,andforklifts)andtrucksidlingandtravellingtoandfromthesite(concrete,excavation). EmissionswerealsocalculatedseparatelyforconstructionofthetowersandrehabilitationofthePalladium.

3.0 Methodology November 2015


3.1.2 Operations

OperationalhealthriskimpactswereanalyzedquantitativelyintheDEIR. TheProject’soperationalhealthriskimpactswasreassessedusingtheupdatedOEHHAguidelines,takingintoaccountagesensitivityfactorsaswellastheupdatedexposurefactors.Asdiscussedpreviously,sourcesofemissionsincludecharbroilers,maintenanceandtestingoftwoon‐siteemergencygenerators,andon‐siteidlingofmedium‐andheavy‐dutytrucksandTRUs.

As shown in Figure 2, ConstructionSource‐ReceptorDiagram, a 0.25 mile radius was selected based onSCAQMDrecommendationsforsitingsourcesoftoxicsinrelationtosensitivereceptors(schools,residentialuses).3

3.2 EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS

3.2.1 Construction

Project‐relatedconstructionemissionswereestimatedconsistentwiththeDEIRwhichusedtheCalEEMod(Version 2013.2.2) software, an emissions inventory software program recommended by the SCAQMD.CalEEModisbasedonoutputsfromOFFROAD2011andEMFAC2011,whichareemissionsestimationmodelsdevelopedbyCARBandusedtocalculateemissionsfromconstructionactivities,includingon‐andoff‐roadvehicles.AlthoughthecurrentversionofCalEEModisbasedonEMFAC2011,theanalysisfortheProjecthasbeen updated with EMFAC2014 which was released in December 2014. The input values used in thisanalysis were adjusted to be Project‐specific based on equipment types and the construction schedule.Emissionswere calculated for diesel particulatematter resulting from heavy equipment usage and truckengines.

Project Design Feature and Mitigation Measure Included in the Draft EIR

Projectdesignfeatures(PDF)andmitigationmeasuresassumedintheDEIRwerealsoincorporatedintotheanalysis. Project design features and mitigation measures applicable to project‐related constructionactivitiesinclude:

PDF‐GHG‐1: Construction Measures: The Project shall utilize off‐road diesel‐poweredconstruction equipment thatmeet or exceed the CARB andUSEPATier 3 off‐roademissions standards for those equipment rated at 50 hp or greater during thegrading,concretepouringandbuildingconstructionphasesofProjectconstruction.The Project shall utilize on‐road haul trucks that meet or exceed the model year2010emissionstandards Acopyofeachunit’scertifiedtierspecificationormodelyear specification and CARB or SCAQMD operating permit (if applicable) shall beavailable upon request at the time of mobilization of each applicable unit ofequipment.

MM‐AQ‐1: TheApplicantshallimplementthefollowingmeasurestoreducetheemissionsofairpollutants generated by heavy‐duty diesel‐powered equipment operating at theProjectSite:

3 AirQualityIssuesinSchoolSiteSelection,SouthCoastAirQualityManagementDistrict,June2005.

November 2015 3.0 Methodology


Themostcurrentgradeofultra‐lowsulfurdiesel(ULSD)fuelapprovedbyCARBandavailableintheSouthCoastAirBasinshallbeusedforallheavy‐dutydiesel‐poweredequipmentoperatingand/orrefuelingattheProjectSite

Truckandequipmentidlingandqueuingtimeshallbelimitedtofiveminutesorless,whenequipmentisnotinactiveuse,inaccordancewiththeCARBAirborneToxicControlMeasure;

Theuseof theelectricity infrastructuresurrounding theconstructionsitesshallbe used wherever available and possible rather than electrical generatorspoweredbyinternalcombustionengines;

Utilize construction equipment having the minimum practical engine size (i.e.,lowestappropriatehorsepowerratingfortheintendedjob);

All construction equipment operating on‐site shall be properly maintained(including engine tuning) at all times in accordance with manufacturers'specificationsandschedules;

Tampering with construction equipment to increase horsepower or to defeatemissioncontroldevicesshallbeprohibited;

Theuseofallconstructionequipmentshallbesuspendedduringasecond‐stagesmogalertintheimmediatevicinityoftheProjectSite.

Refinements to Project Design Feature

SincethepreparationoftheDEIR,thedeveloperhasrefinedandincorporatedadditionalemissionscontrolmeasuresinPDF‐GHG‐1inordertoreduceimpactsduetoconstructiondieselparticulatematteremissions.Thesemeasuresincludeelectrificationofcertainequipmentusedon‐siteanduseofUSEPATier4emissionscompliantequipmenton‐site.TherevisedPDFisprovidedbelow:

PDF‐GHG‐1: Construction Measures: The Project shall utilize off‐road diesel‐poweredconstructionequipment thatmeetorexceedtheCARBandUSEPATier3Tier4off‐roademissionsstandards for thoseequipmentratedat50hporgreaterduring thegrading, concretepouringandbuilding constructionphasesofProject construction.Pole power (electricity delivered from the utility grid) shall be the primarysource of power for usewith on‐site electric tools, equipment, lighting, etc.,except where/when infeasible due to site constraints; diesel generators, ifneeded, shallbe ratedbetween75horsepower (hp)and750hpandmeetorexceed applicable Tier 4 standards. Total diesel generator usage duringconstructionshallnotexceed312,000horsepower‐hours.Cranesandconcretepumpsshallbeelectrifiedwithpolepower.TheProjectshallutilizeon‐roadhaultrucks that meet or exceed the model year 2010 emission standards. Theserequirements shall be included in applicable bid documents and successfulcontractor(s)mustdemonstratetheabilitytosupplysuchequipment.Acopyofeach unit’s certified tier specification or model year specification and CARB orSCAQMDoperatingpermit(ifapplicable)shallbeavailableuponrequestatthetimeofmobilizationofeachapplicableunitofequipment.

Construction Emissions

TheemissionsreductionsassociatedwithrevisedPDF‐GHG_1havebeentakenintoaccountinthisanalysis.The developer has agreed to electrify cranes and pumps (concrete) used during construction activities.



Dieselpoweredgeneratorswerealsoremovedfromtheequipmentfleetmix,andelectricalpowerwouldbeprovided by a power pole. As a result, cranes, pumps, and generators were removed from the projectconstruction equipment mix. In addition, the Project design has been revised to reduce the size of thesubterranean parking structure. As a result, the amount of excavation requiredwould be reduced from235,000cubicyardsto153,000cubicyards.Therefore,theamountofequipmentandnumberoftrucktripsusedduringexcavationwasreducedaccordinglyforthepurposesofthisanalysis.

Table1,ConstructionEquipmentComparisonbetweentheDEIRandCurrentAnalysis,providesacomparisonbetween the construction equipment fleetmix assumed in theDEIR and the current project constructionrequirements.

Table 1

Construction Equipment Comparison between the DEIR and Current Analysis

DEIR Current

Phase Equipment Qty. Hrs./Day

Engine hp Load

Level of Mitigation Qty.

Hrs./ Day

Engine hp Load

Level of Mitigation

Grading/Excavation

Crane 2 8 226 0.29Tier3withLevel3DPF

2 8 ‐‐ ‐‐ Electric

DrillRig 2 8 205 0.50Tier3withLevel3DPF

2 8 205 0.50 Tier4

Excavators 4 8 162 0.38Tier3withLevel3DPF

4 8 162 0.38 Tier4

OtherMaterialHandlingEquipment

1 8 167 0.40Tier3withLevel3DPF

1 8 167 0.40 Tier4

RubberTiredDozers


1 8 255 0.40 Tier4

RubberTiredLoaders


2 8 200 0.36 Tier4

Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8 97 0.37

Tier3withLevel3DPF 2 8 97 0.37 Tier4

Concrete–Continuous

ConcretePumps 8 14 84 0.74Tier3withLevel3DPF


Pour RubberTiredDozers


1 14 255 0.40 Tier4

RubberTiredLoaders


1 14 200 0.36 Tier4

Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes


1 14 97 0.37 Tier4

Concrete–Normal

ConcretePumps 4 8 84 0.74Tier3withLevel3DPF


RubberTiresDozers


1 8 255 0.40 Tier4

BuildingConstruction

Concrete/IndustrialSaw


1 8 81 0.73 Tier4

Cranes 2 7 226 0.29Tier3withLevel3DPF 2 7 ‐‐ ‐‐ Electric

Forklifts 1 8 89 0.20Tier3withLevel3DPF

1 8 89 0.20 Tier4

GeneratorSets 4 8 84 0.74Tier3withLevel3DPF

1 8 84 0.74ReducedNumber,Tier4


Table 1 (Continued)

Construction Equipment Comparison between the DEIR and Current Analysis


DEIR Current

Phase Equipment Qty. Hrs./Day

Engine hp Load

Level of Mitigation Qty.

Hrs./ Day

Engine hp Load

Level of Mitigation

AerialLift 2 8 62 0.31Tier3withLevel3DPF

2 8 62 0.31 Tier4

OtherConstructionEquipment


2 8 171 0.42 Tier4

Pumps 4 8 84 0.74Tier3withLevel3DPF


RubberTiredLoaders


1 8 200 0.36 Tier4

SkidSteerLoader 2 8 65 0.37Tier3withLevel3DPF

2 8 65 0.37 Tier4


2 7 97 0.37 Tier3withLevel3DPF

2 7 97 0.37 Tier4

PavingCementandMortarMixers

1 6 9 0.56 None 1 6 9 0.56 Tier4

Pavers 1 8 125 0.42Tier3withLevel3DPF

1 8 125 0.42 Tier4

PavingEquipment 1 6 130 0.36Tier3withLevel3DPF

1 6 130 0.36 Tier4

Rollers 1 6 80 0.38Tier3withLevel3DPF

1 6 80 0.38 Tier4



1 8 97 0.37 Tier4

RehabilitationAerialLift


1 8 62 0.31 Tier4

Dumpers/Tenders


1 8 16 0.38 Tier4

DPF – diesel particulate filter


AtthetimeofDEIRpreparation,theCARBEMFAC2011on‐roadvehicleemissionsmodelwasusedtoanalyzehaulandconcretetruckemissions.TheEMFAC2011emissionsmodelwasthemostrecentmodelavailablefromCARBat the timetheDEIRwasprepared. However,since that time,CARBreleasedtheEMFAC2014model inDecember2014,which is anupdate toEMFAC2011. Inorder to incorporate the latestavailableemissionfactors, theconstructionemissionsanalysiswasrevisedto includeEMFAC2014emission factors.Consistentwith PDF‐GHG‐1 identified in theDEIR, excavation haul trucksweremodeled as year 2010 ornewer.TheseupdatestotheHRAanalysisaresummarizedinTable2,ConstructionAssumptionComparisonbetweentheDEIRandCurrentAnalysis. As the analysis focuseson impacts tonearby receptors, emissionswerecalculatedfortruckstravellingonstreetsadjacenttotheproject.

TherevisionsshowninTable1andTable2wereincorporatedintotheCalEEModandemissionsmodelingspreadsheets for this analysis. Project‐related constructionDPM emissionswere calculated on an annualbasisforhealthriskcalculations.EmissionswerecalculatedseparatelyforconstructionofthenewbuildingassociatedwiththeProjectandrehabilitationoftheexistingPalladium.DetailedconstructionTACemissionscalculationsandCalEEModfilesareprovidedinAppendixA.1ofthisreport.



Table 2

Construction Assumption Comparison between the DEIR and Current Analysis

Parameter DEIR Current

ExcavationVolume 235,000 cubicyards 153,000cubicyardsEmissionFactormodel EMFAC2011 EMFAC2014

HaulTruckFleetModelYear 2010 ornewer 2010ornewer


3.2.2 Operations

Project‐relatedoperationalemissionswereestimatedasdiscussedintheDEIR.Asdiscussedonpage4.B‐27oftheDEIR,TACemissionsduringoperationwouldberelatedtocharbroilingactivitiesthatmayoccurattheproposed restaurant uses and diesel emissions from trucks and the emergency generators. The DEIRdeterminedthattheprimarycontributortotheriskwasemissionsfromrestaurantcharbroiling. Althoughrisks were determined to be less than significant, the DEIR relied on uncontrolled TAC emissions fromcharbroiling. However, restaurant charbroiling in the South Coast Air Basin is required to comply withSCAQMDRule1138 (ControlofEmissions fromRestaurantOperations),which requires the installationofemissions controls on charbroilers. For the purposes of this reassessment using the updated OEHHAguidelines,controlledTACemissions fromrestaurantcharbroilingwasusedconsistentwithSCAQMDRule1138,whichresultsinareductionofTACemissionsbyapproximately83percent.DetailedoperationalTACemissionsareprovidedinAppendixA.2ofthisreport.

3.3 DISPERSION MODELING

Dispersion modeling was performed using the AMS/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD), version 14134.Meteorologicaldata from theSCAQMD’sDowntownLAmonitoring stationwithinSourceReceptorArea1wasusedtorepresentlocalweatherconditionsandprevailingwindsdata.TerraindatafromU.S.GeologicalSurvey(USGS)wasusedtoassignelevationstosourcesandmodelingreceptors.

Sensitive receptors considered in the DEIRwere also analyzed in this HRA. Existing sensitive receptorsinclude:

ResidentialAreas: Existing multi‐family uses are located in a mixed‐use developmentapproximately275feettothenorthwestoftheProjectSiteonthenorthwestcornerofArgyleAvenueand SelmaAvenue. Lowdensity residential neighborhoodswith single andmulti‐family units arelocatedapproximately400feettothesouthoftheProjectSiteonthesouthernsideofLelandWay;andapproximately500feettotheeastoftheProjectSiteontheeastsideofGowerStreet.

Other Sensitive Uses: Additional existing sensitive receptors are located farther away from theProjectSite than those listedabove. TheHollywoodCommunityHospital is locatedapproximately550 feet to thesouthof theProjectSiteon thenorthsideofDeLongpreAvenue. TheMontessoriShir‐HashirimSchool is located approximately 700 feet to the northeast of theProject Site on thenorthsideofCarltonWay.



BeyondtheexistingdevelopmentthatcouldpotentiallybeimpactedbyProjectconstruction,therearefourfuture residential projects in the nearby vicinity of the Project Site that could be impacted should theybecomeconstructedandoccupiedpriortotheconstructionoftheProject.FuturesensitivelandusesincloseproximitytotheProjectSiteincludethefollowing:

Related Project 11: Selma and Vine Project. Mixed use multi‐family residential project locatedapproximately85feet,caddycornerfromtheProjectSiteacrossArgyleAvenue.

RelatedProject9:BLVD6200.Mixed‐usemultifamilyresidentialproject,locatedapproximately250feetnorthoftheProjectSite.

Related Project 44: Columbia Square. Mixed‐use project with a residential tower locatedapproximate140feeteastoftheProjectSite,acrossElCentroAvenue.

RelatedProject60: 6250SunsetProject. Mixed‐usemulti‐familyresidentiallocatedapproximately100feetsouthoftheProjectSite,acrossSunsetBoulevard.

Dispersionmodelingwasperformedatexistingand futurepotentialsensitivereceptors. Maximumhealthrisk impacts were identified at sensitive receptors, existing or future, that would result in the highestconcentrationsofTACsaccordingtotheAERMODdispersionmodelinganalysis.

3.3.1 Construction

Asdiscussedabove,constructionemissionswerecalculatedforthreeseparatesources:(1)Constructionofthetowers;(2)Haultruckidlingandtravelonstreetsadjacenttotheproject;and(3)RehabilitationofthePalladium. These sources (construction, truck, rehabilitation)were entered into the AERMODdispersionmodelseparatelyaslinevolumesources.Constructionactivitiesandassociatedemissionswereassumedtooccur during allowable construction hours (7AM‐9PM). A scalar emission rate (1 g/s) was used for allsourcesforlaterinputintotheHotspotsAnalysisandReportingProgram(HARP).

ReceptorswereplacedatnearbyexistingandfuturesensitivereceptorsasdiscussedaboveandidentifiedintheDEIR.Receptorsrepresentnearbyresidentialuses.However,residentialbuildingsneartheprojectsitetypically contain a lobby on the first floorwith residential uses starting on the second floor. Therefore,residentialreceptorsweremodeledata20footheight(flagpolereceptor)torepresent2ndstorywindows.Thesource‐receptorconfigurationforconstructiondispersionmodelingisshownasFigure2.

3.3.2 Operations

Asdiscussedabove,operationalemissionswerecalculatedforthefollowingseparatesources:(1)restaurantcharbroilers;(2)maintenanceandtestingoftwoon‐siteemergencygenerators;(3)on‐siteidlingofmedium‐andheavy‐dutytrucks;and(4)on‐siteidlingofTRUs. Operationalemissionsfromrestaurantcharbroilingwere modeled as area sources coinciding with the proposed restaurant uses. Emissions from the twoemergency generators as a result ofmaintenance and testingweremodeled as stationary point sources.Buoyancyeffects from theexhaustplume temperatureand flowrate andeffects frombuildingdownwashwereincorporatedintothestackemissionsfromtheemergencygenerators.Incidentalemissionsfromon‐site idling of medium‐ and heavy‐duty trucks and transportation refrigeration units (TRUs) were alsoincludedastheanalysisasareasourcesatloading/unloadingareas.



Sensitive receptors were represented as Cartesian grid receptors and were placed at 20‐meter intervalsoutsidetheboundaryoftheProjectSiteatsensitivereceptorlocationstocovernearbyexistingandpotentialfuturesensitivereceptors.Thesource‐receptorconfigurationforoperationaldispersionmodelingisshownasFigure3.

3.4 CANCER RISK AND HEALTH RISK CALCULATIONS

Cancerriskforproject‐relatedconstructionactivitieswascalculatedusingtheCARB’smostrecentversionofHARP(version2)whichwasreleasedMarch2015.ThisversionofHARPincorporatesthemostrecentOfficeofEnvironmentalHealthHazardAssessment(OEHHA)guidelinesforhealthriskassessments.Theexposureduration was assumed to be 3 years for construction and 30 years for long‐term operation activities.ExposurewasbasedondefaultvaluesprovidedbyOEHHAandwithinHARP (whichhasbeenupdated toaccountforthemostrecentOEHHAguidelinesforhealthriskassessments).Operationalhealthriskimpactswere originally assessed using spreadsheet methodology in the DEIR. The operational HRA has beenupdatedbasedonthemorerecentOEHHAguidelinesconsistentwithHARP(version2).

Inperforminghealthriskcalculations,carcinogeniccompoundsarenotconsideredtohavethresholdlevels(i.e.,doselevelsbelowwhichtherearenorisks). Anyexposure,therefore,willhavesomeassociatedrisk.Incremental health risks associated with exposure to carcinogenic compounds is defined in terms of theprobability of developing cancer as a result of exposure to a chemical at a given concentration. Under adeterministic approach (i.e., point estimate methodology), the cancer risk probability is determined bymultiplyingthechemical’sannualconcentrationbyitsunitriskfactor(URF). TheURFisameasureofthecarcinogenicpotentialofachemicalwhenadoseisreceivedthroughtheinhalationpathway.Itrepresentsanupperboundestimateof theprobabilityofcontractingcancerasaresultofcontinuousexposure toanambientconcentrationofonemicrogrampercubicmeter(µg/m3)overa70‐yearlifetime.TheURFsutilizedin the assessment and the corresponding cancer potency factors (CPF) were obtained principally fromOEHHAGuidance.

Rec

epto

rs

Sou

rce:

Tow

er C

onst

ruct

ion

Sou

rce:

Reh

abili

tatio

n

Sou

rce:

Hau

l Rou

te

FIG

UR

EC

on

stru

co

n S

ou

rce

- R

ece

pto

r D

iagr

am

Pal

lad

ium

Re

sid

en

ces

2So

urc

e: P

CR

Ser

vice

s C

orp

ora

on

, 20

15

.

PC

R

0.2

km

N

Pro

ject

Site

Sen

sitiv

e R

ecep

tors

Hig

h-R

ise

Bui

ldin

gs

Est

imat

ed C

ance

r B

urde

n A

rea

FIG

UR

EO

pe

rao

ns

Sou

rce

- R

ece

pto

r D

iagr

am

Pal

lad

ium

Re

sid

en

ces

3So

urc

e: P

CR

Ser

vice

s C

orp

ora

on

, 20

14

.

PC

R

0.2

km

N



Fortheinhalationpathway,thecancerriskcharacterizationprocedurerequirestheincorporationofseveraldiscrete variables to effectively quantify dose. Once determined, contaminant dose is multiplied by thecancer potency factor (CPF) in units of inverse dose expressed in milligrams per kilogram per day(mg/kg/day)‐1andotherexposurefactorstoderivethecancerriskestimate.Therefore,toaccommodatetheuniqueexposuresassociatedwiththesensitivereceptors,thefollowingdosealgorithmwasutilized.

CDI=(CAIR×{BR/BW}×A×EF)

Where: CDI = Chronicdailyintake(mg/kg/day); CAIR = Concentrationofcontaminantinair(mg/m3); {BR/BW} = DailyBreathingRatenormalizedtobodyweight(l/kgbodyweight‐day); EF = Exposurefrequency(days/year); A = Inhalationabsorptionfactor(unitless).

OEHHArecommendeddefaultvalues for theparameters listedabovewereused in theHRAanalysis. Thedailybreathing rate {BR/BW}used in the analysiswasbasedonwasbasedonOEHHArecommendationswhichvarydependingonagewhichareshowninTable3,OEHHARecommendedResidentialDailyBreathingRatesforPointEstimateDoseCalculations(L/kgbodyweight). Therecommendedexposurefrequency(EF)is350daysperyearwhich isequivalent to0.96(350days/365daysayear). The inhalationabsorptionfactor(A)isassumedtobe1forinhalationbasedriskassessment.4

Oncedoseiscalculated,cancerriskiscalculatedbyaccountingforcancerpotencyofthespecificpollutant,agesensitivity,exposureduration,averagingtimeforlifetimecancerrisk,andfractionoftimespentathome(sensitive receptor). The Cancer Potency Factor (CPF) is specific for each pollutant and is determinedthroughpeerreviewedscientificstudies.OEHHAhasdeterminedthatDieselparticulatematter(DPM)hasaunitriskfactorof3.0E‐4(ug/m3)‐1andaslopefactorof1.1(mg/kg‐day)‐1.5TheAgeSensitivityFactor(ASF)accountsforgreatersusceptibilityinearlylife,startingfromthe3rdtrimesterofpregnancyto70years.Thefraction of time at home (FAH) takes into account the time actually residing at the sensitive receptorlocation. Fraction of time at home also takes into account time spent at time for various age groups.Exposuredurationforpurposesofthishealthriskassessmentwasassumedtobe3yearsforconstructionand30yearsforlong‐termoperations,consistentwithOEHHArecommendationsforresidentialuses.

4 OEHHA,AirToxicsHotSpotsProgramGuidanceManualforPreparationofHealthRiskAssessments,(August2003)5‐16.5 OEHHAHotSpotsUnitRiskandCancerPotencyFactors.May2009.

Table 3

OEHHA Recommended Residential Daily Breathing Rates for Point Estimate Dose Calculations (L / kg body weight)

3rd Trimester 0 < 2 Years 2 < 9 Years 2 < 16 Years 16 < 30 Years

Average 225 658 535 452 21095thPercentile 361 1090 861 745 335

Source: OEHHA Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual. February 2015.



Asshownintheequationbelow,theincrementalincreaseincancerriskistheproductofthedoseandthepollutant‐specificCPF,ASF,ED,andFAHvalues.Cancerriskiscalculatedbymultiplyingtheinhalationdoseby the inhalation cancer potency factor to yield thepotential inhalation excess cancer risk. The followingequationillustratestheformulaforcalculatingcancerrisk.Toconvertthisriskvaluetochancespermillionofdevelopingcancer,thepotentialcancerriskismultipliedby106.

CancerRisk=Dose(mg/kg‐day)×CPF(mg/kg‐day)‐1xASFxED/ATxFAH

Where: Dose = Amountofaspecificpollutantapersonisexposedto(mg/kg‐day) CPF = CancerPotencyFactor,thecancerpotencyofaspecificpollutant(mg/kg‐day)‐1 ASF = AgeSensitivityFactor(unitless)

ED/AT = ExposureDuration,howlongapersonwillbeexposedtoaspecificpollutantintheirlifetime (years)/Averaging Time, length of time over which the average dose iscalculated(days)

FAH = Fractionoftimeathome(unitless)

Asindicatedintheequationabove,eachagegrouphasdifferentexposureparameterswhichrequirecancerrisk to be calculated separately for each age group. FAH values are presented in Table 4, OEHHARecommendationsforFractionofTimeatHome(FAH)forEvaluatingResidentialCancerRisk. DetailedhealthriskcalculationsareprovidedinAppendixA.

Table 4

OEHHA Recommendations for Fraction of Time at Home (FAH) for Evaluating Residential Cancer Risk

Age Range Fraction of Time at Residence

3rdTrimesterand0<2Years 0.852<16Years 0.7216–70Years 0.73

Source: OEHHA Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual. February 2015.


4.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS

Health risk impacts (cancer risk) were assessed for existing and future off‐site sensitive receptors(residential uses). Table5,SummaryofCarcinogenicRisksforOn‐SiteSensitiveReceptors, summarizes thecarcinogenicriskforrepresentativereceptorslocatedthroughouttheSite.Forcarcinogenicexposures,thecancerriskfromDPMemissionsfortheProjectSiteresultedinamaximumcarcinogenicriskof6.5peronemillionforthe3‐yearconstructionduration. Maximumimpactswouldoccuratsensitivereceptorseastofthe site. Riskatnearby receptors to the southandwest of the sitewould rangebetween3and5 inonemillion. This scenario isbasedonahighlyconservative3‐year (construction)or30‐year (operation),24‐hours‐per‐day, seven‐days‐per‐week exposure. As discussed above, the lifetime exposure under OEHHAguidelinestakesintoaccountearlylife(infantandchildren)exposure.Itshouldbenotedthatthecalculatedcancerriskassumessensitivereceptors(residentialuses)wouldnothaveanymitigationsuchasmechanicalfiltration and exposure with windows open. The current City of Los Angeles Building Code requiresmechanical filtration with a Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) of 11 or higher for newconstruction.ThiswouldreducetypicalindoorPM10concentrationsbyatleast85percent.Therefore,actualcancerriskimpactstooff‐sitesensitivereceptorswouldbelowerthanthosereportedinTable5.

The HRA worksheets (provided in Appendix A) provide a detailed breakdown of these calculations. Insummary,theProjectSite’sworst‐caselocationwouldnotbeexposedtocancerriskinexcessoftheSCAQMDsignificancethresholdof10peronemillion.Asaresult,off‐siteresidentialreceptorswouldbeprovidedanadequate health‐based separation distance from the project construction and operational activities andwouldbeconsideredlessthansignificant.

Table 5

Summary of Carcinogenic Risks for Off‐site Sensitive Receptors

Risk Scenario Carcinogenic Risk Per One Million*

ProjectConstructionMaximumExposedIndividual(MEI)–EastofSite 6.5ProjectOperationMaximumExposedIndividual(MEI)–EastofSite 2.0

See calculation worksheets presented in Appendix. *The significance threshold is 10 per million. Source: PCR Services Corporation, 2015

4.0 Impact Analysis November 2015




5.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS

A constructionHRAwas conducted for the Project pursuant to the newOEHHAmethodology adopted inMarch2015.Inaddition,theoperationalHRAprovidedintheDEIRwasupdatedtoreflectthenewOEHHAmethodology. Since the preparation of the DEIR, the developer has agreed to refine and incorporateadditionalemissionscontrolmeasuresinPDF‐GHG‐1inordertoreduceimpactsduetoconstructiondieselparticulatematteremissions.Thesemeasuresincludeelectrificationofcertainequipmentusedon‐siteanduse of USEPA Tier 4 emissions compliant equipment on‐site. The revised PDF, provided below, wasincorporatedintotheanalysis.

PDF‐GHG‐1: Construction Measures: The Project shall utilize off‐road diesel‐poweredconstructionequipment thatmeetorexceedtheCARBandUSEPATier3Tier4off‐roademissionsstandards for thoseequipmentratedat50hporgreaterduring thegrading, concretepouringandbuilding constructionphasesofProject construction.Pole power (electricity delivered from the utility grid) shall be the primarysource of power for usewith on‐site electric tools, equipment, lighting, etc.,except where/when infeasible due to site constraints; diesel generators, ifneeded, shallbe ratedbetween75horsepower (hp)and750hpandmeetorexceed applicable Tier 4 standards. Total diesel generator usage duringconstructionshallnotexceed312,000horsepower‐hours.Cranesandconcretepumpsshallbeelectrifiedwithpolepower.TheProjectshallutilizeon‐roadhaultrucks that meet or exceed the model year 2010 emission standards. Theserequirements shall be included in applicable bid documents and successfulcontractor(s)mustdemonstratetheabilitytosupplysuchequipment.Acopyofeach unit’s certified tier specification or model year specification and CARB orSCAQMDoperatingpermit(ifapplicable)shallbeavailableuponrequestatthetimeofmobilizationofeachapplicableunitofequipment

TheoperationalHRAin theDEIRdeterminedthat theprimarycontributor to theriskwasemissions fromrestaurant charbroiling. Riskswere determined to be less than significant; however, the DEIR relied onuncontrolled TAC emissions from charbroiling. Restaurant charbroiling in the South Coast Air Basin isrequired to comply with SCAQMD Rule 1138 (Control of Emissions from Restaurant Operations), whichrequirestheinstallationofemissionscontrolsoncharbroilers.ForthepurposesofthisreassessmentusingtheupdatedOEHHAguidelines,controlledTACemissionsfromrestaurantcharbroilingwasusedconsistentwithSCAQMDRule1138,whichresultsinareductionofTACemissionsbyapproximately83percent.

Basedonanexposuredurationof3years forproject constructionand30years for long‐termoperations,health risk impacts to off‐site sensitive receptors due to TAC emissions fromproject‐related constructionandoperationswouldbelessthansignificantandnomitigationmeasuresarerequired. Receptorslocatedfartherawayfromtheproject‐sitewouldresultinareducedcancerriskimpacts.

In summary, the Project Site’s worst‐case location would not be exposed to cancer risk in excess of theSCAQMDsignificancethresholdof10peronemillion.Asaresult,off‐siteresidentialuseswouldprovideanadequatehealth‐basedseparationdistancefromsourcesofprojectemissionsandwouldbeconsideredlessthansignificant,consistentwiththefindingsintheDEIR.

5.0 Summary of Results November 2015



PalladiumResidences HealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportPCRServicesCorporation

APPENDIX A HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETS AND OUTPUT FILES

t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

PalladiumResidencesHealthRiskAssessmentTechnicalReportAppendixA,HealthRiskAssessmentWorksheetsandOutputFilesA.1 ConstructionHRA

A.1.1 EmissionsInventory

A.1.1.1 Construction

ConstructionEquipmentList

CalEEModAnnualOutput

A.1.1.2 Rehabilitation

RehabilitationEquipmentList


A.1.1.3 HaulRoad

EMFAC2014Output

HaulTruck(AnnualEmissions)

A.1.1.4 DieselParticulateEmissionsSummary

A.1.2 AERMODSource‐ReceptorDiagram

(AERMODOutputavailableelectronically)

A1.3 HARPOutputFiles

A.2 OperationsHRA


SourceParameters

DeliveryTruck

TransportationRefrigerationUnitEmissions

DieselEmergencyGeneratorEmissions

CharbroilingEmissions

A.2.2 AERMODDispersionModeling

A.2.2.1 AERMODInputs

SourceProperties

BuildingHeights

A.2.2.2 AERMODSource‐ReceptorDiagram

A.2.3 HealthRiskFactorsandAcuteSpeciation

DieselTruckExhaustEmissions

StationaryDieselEngineExhaustEmissions


A2.4 CancerRiskCalculations

A.2.4.1 MaximumIndividualCancerRisk(MICR)

MICRforages0to2

MICRforages2to16

MICRforages16to30

MICRforages31to70

A.2.4.2 MaximumIndividualCancerRiskbySource

A.2.4.3 MICR–OldOEHHAMethodology,WithControlledCharbroilerEmissions

AppendixA.1ConstructionHRA

A.1.1 EmissionsInventoryA.1.2 AERMODSource‐ReceptorDiagramA1.3 HARPOutputFiles


A.1.1EmissionsInventoryA.1.1.1 ConstructionA.1.1.2 RehabilitationA.1.1.3 HaulRoadA.1.1.4 DieselParticulateEmissionsSummary


A.1.1EmissionsInventoryA.1.1.1 Construction

ConstructionEquipmentList


Pal

lad

ium C

on

stru

ctio

n E

qu

ipm

en

t

Co

nst

ruct

ion P

has

eEq

uip

me

nt

Cal

EEM

od E

qu

ipm

en

tFu

el

Nu

mb

er

Hrs

/Day

HP

Load

Gra

din

g /

Exca

vati

on

Cra

ne

Ru

bb

er T

ired

Do

zers

Ele

ctri

c2

8

22

60

.29

Gra

din

g /

Exca

vati

on

Dri

ll R

igG

rad

ers

Die

sel

2

8

20

50

.50

Gra

din

g /

Exca

vati

on

Exca

vato

rsEx

cava

tors

Die

sel

4

8

16

20

.38

Gra

din

g /

Exca

vati

on

Oth

er M

ater

ial H

and

ling

Equ

ipm

ent

Exca

vato

rsD

iese

l1

8

16

70

.40

Gra

din

g /

Exca

vati

on

Ru

bb

er T

ired

Do

zers

Ru

bb

er T

ired

Do

zers

Die

sel

1

8

25

50

.40

Gra

din

g /

Exca

vati

on

Ru

bb

er T

ired

Lo

ader

sG

rad

ers

Die

sel

2

8

20

00

.36

Gra

din

g /

Exca

vati

on

Trac

tors

/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes

Trac

tors

/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes

Die

sel

2

8

97

0

.37

Co

ncr

ete‐

Co

nti

no

us

Po

ur

Co

ncr

ete

Pu

mp

sTr

acto

rs/L

oad

ers/

Bac

kho

esEl

ect

ric

8

14

84

0

.74

Co

ncr

ete‐

Co

nti

no

us

Po

ur

Ru

bb

er T

ires D

oze

rsR

ub

ber T

ires D

oze

rsD

iese

l1

14

25

50

.40

Co

ncr

ete‐

Co

nti

no

us

Po

ur

Ru

bb

er T

ired

Lo

ader

sR

ub

ber T

ires D

oze

rsD

iese

l1

14

20

00

.36

Co

ncr

ete‐

Co

nti

no

us

Po

ur

Trac

tors

/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes

Trac

tors

/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes

Die

sel

1

14

97

0

.37

Co

ncr

ete‐

No

rmal

Co

ncr

ete P

um

ps

Trac

tors

/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes

Ele

ctri

c4

8

84

0

.74

Co

ncr

ete‐

No

rmal

Ru

bb

er T

ires D

oze

rsR

ub

ber T

ires D

oze

rsD

iese

l1

8

25

50

.40

Bu

ildin

g C

on

stru

ctio

nC

on

cret

e/In

du

stri

al S

awG

ener

ato

r Se

tsD

iese

l1

8

81

0

.73

Bu

ildin

g C

on

stru

ctio

nC

ran

esC

ran

esEl

ect

ric

2

7

22

60

.29

Bu

ildin

g C

on

stru

ctio

nFo

rklif

tsFo

rklif

tsD

iese

l1

8

89

0

.20

Bu

ildin

g C

on

stru

ctio

nG

ener

ato

r Se

tsG

ener

ato

r Se

tsD

iese

l1

8

84

0

.74

Bu

ildin

g C

on

stru

ctio

nA

eria

l Lif

tW

eld

ers

Die

sel

2

8

62

0

.31

Bu

ildin

g C

on

stru

ctio

nO

ther C

on

stru

ctio

n E

qu

ipm

ent

Trac

tors

/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes

Die

sel

2

8

17

10

.42

Bu

ildin

g C

on

stru

ctio

nP

um

ps

Fork

lifts

Ele

ctri

c4

8

84

0

.74

Bu

ildin

g C

on

stru

ctio

nR

ub

ber T

ired

Lo

ader

sC

ran

esD

iese

l1

8

20

00

.36

Bu

ildin

g C

on

stru

ctio

nSk

id S

teer L

oad

erW

eld

ers

Die

sel

2

8

65

0

.37

Bu

ildin

g C

on

stru

ctio

nTr

acto

rs/L

oad

ers/

Bac

kho

esTr

acto

rs/L

oad

ers/

Bac

kho

esD

iese

l2

7

97

0

.37

Arc

hit

ectu

ral C

oat

ing

Air C

om

pre

sso

rsA

ir C

om

pre

sso

rsD

iese

l1

6

78

0

.48

Pav

ing

Cem

ent

and M

ort

ar M

ixer

sC

emen

t an

d M

ort

ar M

ixer

sD

iese

l1

6

9

0.5

6

Pav

ing

Pav

ers

Pav

ers

Die

sel

1

8

12

50

.42

Pav

ing

Pav

ing

Equ

ipm

ent

Pav

ing

Equ

ipm

ent

Die

sel

1

6

13

00

.36

Pav

ing

Ro

llers

Ro

llers

Die

sel

1

6

80

0

.38

Pav

ing

Trac

tors

/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes

Trac

tors

/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes

Die

sel

1

8

97

0

.37

Cal

EE

Mod

Ver

sion

: Cal

EE

Mod

.201

3.2.

2P

age

1 of

1D

ate:

10/

21/2

015

4:32

PM

Palla

dium

Res

iden

ces

- Con

stru

ctio

nSo

uth

Coa

st A

QM

D A

ir D

istr

ict,

Ann

ual

1.0

Proj

ect C

hara

cter

istic

s

1.1

Land

Usa

ge

Land

Use

sS

ize

Met

ricLo

t Acr

eage

Flo

or S

urfa

ce A

rea

Pop

ulat

ion

Enc

lose

d P

arki

ng S

truc

ture

654.

0010

00sq

ft0.

0065

4,00

0.00

0

Hea

lth C

lub

12.0

010

00sq

ft0.

3012

,000

.00

0

Hig

h T

urno

ver

(Sit

Dow

n R

esta

uran

t)14

.00

1000

sqft

0.30

14,0

00.0

00

Rec

reat

iona

l Sw

imm

ing

Poo

l10

7.10

1000

sqft

0.50

107,

100.

000

Apa

rtm

ents

Hig

h R

ise

731.

00D

wel

ling

Uni

t2.

5085

0,00

0.00

1550

1.2

Oth

er P

roje

ct C

hara

cter

istic

s

Urb

aniz

atio

nU

rban

Win

d Sp

eed

(m/s

)2.

2Pr

ecip

itatio

n Fr

eq (D

ays)

31

Clim

ate

Zone

11O

pera

tiona

l Yea

r20

18

Util

ity C

ompa

nyLo

s A

ngel

es D

epar

tmen

t of W

ater

& P

ower

CO

2 In

tens

ity

(lb/M

Whr

)10

94C

H4

Inte

nsity

(lb

/MW

hr)

0.02

9N

2O In

tens

ity

(lb/M

Whr

)0.

006

1.3

Use

r Ent

ered

Com

men

ts &

Non

-Def

ault

Dat

a

Pro

ject

Cha

ract

eris

tics

- C

O2

Inte

nsity

Fac

tor:

Los

Ang

eles

Dep

artm

ent o

f Wat

er a

nd P

ower

, 201

3 P

ower

Inte

grat

ed R

esou

rce

Pla

n, (

2013

).

Land

Use

- R

esid

entia

l/Am

eniti

es (

731

DU

, 850

ksf

); R

etai

l/Res

taur

ant (

14 k

sf);

Indo

or R

ec A

rea

(12

ksf)

; Out

door

Cou

rt, P

ool/R

oofto

p T

erra

ce/B

alco

nies

(1

07.1

ksf

, 2.4

6 ac

res)

, Par

king

Str

uctu

re (

654

ksf)

.C

onst

ruct

ion

Pha

se -

Gra

ding

(1/

1/16

-5/3

1/16

); C

oncr

ete-

Con

tinuo

us (

6/1/

16-6

/2/1

6); C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

(6/

3/16

-4/1

5/18

); B

uild

ing

(6/3

/16-

12/1

5/18

);

Coa

ting

(5/1

6/18

-12/

15/1

8); P

avin

g (1

1/16

/18-

12/3

1/18

).O

ff-ro

ad E

quip

men

t - 1

Gra

ding

: 1 R

ubbe

r T

ired

Doz

er; 2

Rub

ber

Tire

d Lo

ader

s (s

how

n as

Gra

ders

); 2

Tra

ctor

s/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes;

4 E

xcav

ator

s.O

ff-ro

ad E

quip

men

t - 1

a G

radi

ng: 1

Oth

er M

ater

ial H

andl

ing

Equ

ipm

ent (

show

n as

Exc

avat

or);

2 D

rill R

ig (

show

n as

Gra

der)

; 0 C

rane

(sh

own

as R

ubbe

r T

ired

Doz

er).

Off-

road

Equ

ipm

ent -

2 C

oncr

ete-

Con

tinuo

us: 1

Rub

ber

Tire

d D

ozer

; 1 T

ract

or/L

oade

r/B

ackh

oe.

Off-

road

Equ

ipm

ent -

2a

Con

cret

e-C

ontin

uous

: 1 R

ubbe

r T

ired

Load

er (

show

n as

Rub

ber

Tire

d D

ozer

); 0

Con

cret

e P

umps

(sh

own

as

Tra

ctor

s/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes)

.O

ff-ro

ad E

quip

men

t -

Off-

road

Equ

ipm

ent -

3 C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

: 1 R

ubbe

r T

ired

Doz

er.

Off-

road

Equ

ipm

ent -

3a

Con

cret

e-N

orm

al: 0

Con

cret

e P

umps

(sh

own

as T

ract

ors/

Load

ers/

Bac

khoe

s).

Off-

road

Equ

ipm

ent -

4 B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

n: 1

Rou

gh T

erra

in F

orkl

ift (

show

n as

For

klift

); 1

Gen

erat

or; 2

Tra

ctor

s/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes;

2 S

kid

Ste

er

Load

ers

(sho

wn

as W

elde

rs).

Off-

road

Equ

ipm

ent -

4a

Bui

ldin

g: 1

Rub

ber

Tire

d Lo

ader

(sh

own

as C

rane

); 0

Pum

ps (

show

n as

For

klift

); 1

Con

cret

e/In

d S

aw (

show

n as

Gen

erat

or);

2

Oth

er C

onst

ruct

ion

Equ

ip (

show

n as

Tra

ctor

s/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes)

; 2 A

eria

l Lift

s (s

how

n as

Wel

ders

).

Off-

road

Equ

ipm

ent -

5 A

rchi

tect

ural

Coa

ting:

1 A

ir C

ompr

esso

r.

Off-

road

Equ

ipm

ent -

6 P

avin

g: 1

Cem

ent/M

orta

r M

ixer

; 1 P

aver

; 1 P

avin

g E

quip

men

t; 1

Rol

ler;

1 T

ract

or/L

oade

r/B

ackh

oe.

Trip

s an

d V

MT

- In

clud

es 2

wat

er tr

ucks

for

Gra

ding

and

Con

cret

e ph

ases

(E

xcav

atio

n ha

ul tr

uck

emis

sion

s ar

e ca

lcul

ated

out

side

of C

alE

EM

od -

see

sp

read

shee

t "E

mis

sion

s A

naly

sis

for

Exc

avat

ion

Hau

l Tru

cks"

).

Gra

ding

- T

otal

Acr

es G

rade

d: 3

.6 a

cres

; Mat

eria

l Exp

orte

d: 2

35,0

00 c

ubic

yar

ds (

Exp

ort h

aul t

ruck

em

issi

ons

are

calc

ulat

ed o

utsi

de o

f Cal

EE

Mod

- s

ee

spre

adsh

eet "

Em

issi

ons

Ana

lysi

s fo

r E

xcav

atio

n H

aul T

ruck

s").

Arc

hite

ctur

al C

oatin

g -

Res

iden

tial I

nter

ior

(850

,000

*2.7

*0.7

5 =

1,7

21,2

50);

Non

-Res

iden

tial I

nter

ior

(133

,100

*2*0

.75

= 1

99,6

50);

Par

king

Ext

erio

r (s

trip

ing,

et

c) (

654,

000*

0.06

= 3

9,24

0). N

o ex

terio

r bu

ildin

g pa

intin

g. L

ow V

OC

pai

nts.

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-ro

ad E

quip

men

t Miti

gatio

n -

Wat

er/s

tabi

lize

unpa

ved

road

s an

d ex

pose

d ar

eas

3 tim

es d

aily

(61

% r

educ

tion

in fu

gitiv

e P

M10

and

PM

2.5)

; T

ier

4 en

gine

s fo

r al

l pie

ces

of e

quip

men

t.

Tab

le N

ame

Col

umn

Nam

eD

efau

lt V

alue

New

Val

ue

tblA

rchi

tect

ural

Coa

ting

Con

stA

rea_

Non

resi

dent

ial_

Ext

erio

r39

3,55

0.00

39,2

40.0

0

tblA

rchi

tect

ural

Coa

ting

Con

stA

rea_

Non

resi

dent

ial_

Inte

rior

1,18

0,65

0.00

199,

650.

00

tblA

rchi

tect

ural

Coa

ting

Con

stA

rea_

Res

iden

tial_

Ext

erio

r57

3,75

0.00

0.00

tblA

rchi

tect

ural

Coa

ting

EF

_Non

resi

dent

ial_

Ext

erio

r25

0.00

150.

00

tblA

rchi

tect

ural

Coa

ting

EF

_Non

resi

dent

ial_

Inte

rior

250.

0015

0.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

1.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

1.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

1.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

5.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

1.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

2.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

4.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

1.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

1.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

1.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

4.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

8.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

4.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Num

Day

s18

.00

153.

00

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Num

Day

s23

0.00

661.

00

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Num

Day

s23

0.00

661.

00

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Num

Day

s8.

0075

.00

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Num

Day

s8.

0075

.00

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Num

Day

s18

.00

32.0

0

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Num

Day

s5.

002.

00

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Num

Day

s5.

002.

00

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Num

Day

s5.

0048

6.00

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Num

Day

s5.

0048

6.00

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seE

ndD

ate

7/17

/201

912

/15/

2018

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seE

ndD

ate

10/2

6/20

2012

/15/

2018

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seE

ndD

ate

6/28

/202

112

/15/

2018

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seE

ndD

ate

9/13

/201

65/

31/2

016

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seE

ndD

ate

1/29

/201

912

/31/

2018

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seE

ndD

ate

6/6/

2016

6/2/

2016

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seE

ndD

ate

4/13

/201

84/

15/2

018

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seE

ndD

ate

2/24

/202

04/

15/2

018

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seS

tart

Dat

e12

/16/

2018

5/16

/201

8

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seS

tart

Dat

e4/

16/2

018

6/3/

2016

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seS

tart

Dat

e12

/16/

2018

6/3/

2016

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seS

tart

Dat

e6/

1/20

162/

17/2

016

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seS

tart

Dat

e12

/16/

2018

11/1

6/20

18

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seS

tart

Dat

e6/

3/20

166/

1/20

16

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Pha

seS

tart

Dat

e4/

16/2

018

6/3/

2016

tblG

radi

ngA

cres

OfG

radi

ng75

.00

3.60

tblG

radi

ngA

cres

OfG

radi

ng75

.00

3.60

tblG

radi

ngM

ater

ialE

xpor

ted

0.00

235,

000.

00

tblL

andU

seLa

ndU

seS

quar

eFee

t73

1,00

0.00

850,

000.

00

tblL

andU

seLo

tAcr

eage

15.0

10.

00

tblL

andU

seLo

tAcr

eage

0.28

0.30

tblL

andU

seLo

tAcr

eage

0.32

0.30

tblL

andU

seLo

tAcr

eage

2.46

0.50

tblL

andU

seLo

tAcr

eage

11.7

92.

50

tblL

andU

seP

opul

atio

n2,

091.

001,

550.

00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

226.

0020

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

162.

0016

7.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

89.0

084

.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

84.0

081

.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

174.

0020

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

174.

0020

5.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

255.

0022

6.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

255.

0020

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

97.0

017

1.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

97.0

084

.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

97.0

084

.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

46.0

065

.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Hor

seP

ower

46.0

062

.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.29

0.36

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.38

0.40

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.20

0.74

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.74

0.73

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.41

0.36

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.41

0.50

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.40

0.29

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.40

0.36

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.37

0.42

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.37

0.74

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.37

0.74

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.45

0.37

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Load

Fac

tor

0.45

0.31

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

2.00

1.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

1.00

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

1.00

4.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

3.00

1.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

3.00

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

1.00

2.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

1.00

2.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

2.00

1.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

2.00

1.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

1.00

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

3.00

1.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

3.00

1.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

3.00

1.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

3.00

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

3.00

2.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

3.00

2.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

3.00

2.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

3.00

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

4.00

1.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

4.00

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

4.00

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

4.00

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

1.00

2.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

1.00

2.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Usa

geH

ours

7.00

8.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Usa

geH

ours

8.00

14.0

0

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Usa

geH

ours

8.00

14.0

0

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Usa

geH

ours

7.00

8.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Usa

geH

ours

8.00

14.0

0

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Usa

geH

ours

8.00

14.0

0

tblP

roje

ctC

hara

cter

istic

sC

O2I

nten

sity

Fac

tor

1227

.89

1094

tblP

roje

ctC

hara

cter

istic

sO

pera

tiona

lYea

r20

1420

18

tblT

ripsA

ndV

MT

Hau

lingT

ripN

umbe

r29

,375

.00

0.00

tblT

ripsA

ndV

MT

Ven

dorT

ripN

umbe

r0.

004.

00

tblT

ripsA

ndV

MT

Ven

dorT

ripN

umbe

r0.

004.

00

tblT

ripsA

ndV

MT

Ven

dorT

ripN

umbe

r0.

004.

00

tblT

ripsA

ndV

MT

Ven

dorT

ripN

umbe

r20

7.00

0.00

tblT

ripsA

ndV

MT

Wor

kerT

ripN

umbe

r3.

0023

.00

tblT

ripsA

ndV

MT

Wor

kerT

ripN

umbe

r3.

005.

00

0.00

23.0

0

tblT

ripsA

ndV

MT

Wor

kerT

ripN

umbe

r85

7.00

0.00

tblT

ripsA

ndV

MT

Wor

kerT

ripN

umbe

r

NO

xC

OS

O2

Fug

itive

P

M10

Fug

itive

P

M2.

5E

xhau

st

PM

2.5

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2

2.0

Emis

sion

s Su

mm

ary

2.1

Ove

rall

Con

stru

ctio

nU

nmiti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

RO

GN

Bio

- C

O2

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Yea

rto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

Exh

aust

P

M10

PM

10

Tot

al

2016

1.12

299.

2408

10.6

970

0.01

972.

5725

0.42

072.

9932

1.16

890.

3945

1.56

340.

0000

1,66

1.69

84

1,66

1.69

840.

2059

0.00

001,

666.

021

6

2017

1.36

949.

8776

14.5

246

0.02

882.

8945

0.45

263.

3471

1.18

780.

4278

1.61

560.

0000

2,32

8.49

28

2,32

8.49

280.

2110

0.00

002,

332.

924

5

2018

3.97

617.

7570

13.0

578

0.02

872.

9562

0.34

903.

3051

1.20

400.

3316

1.53

560.

0000

2,24

6.94

19

2,24

6.94

190.

1871

0.00

002,

250.

871

6

Tota

l6.

4684

26.8

753

38.2

794

0.07

710.

6040

0.00

006,

249.

817

78.

4231

1.22

239.

6454

3.56

081.

1538

4.71

46

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

006,

237.

133

16,

237.

1331

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Yea

rto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

2016

0.50

492.

4948

10.2

973

0.01

971.

5188

0.04

031.

5590

0.59

400.

0379

0.63

190.

0000

1,66

1.69

76

1,66

1.69

760.

2059

0.00

001,

666.

020

9

2017

0.73

183.

7187

13.9

347

0.02

882.

0018

0.05

642.

0582

0.69

710.

0528

0.74

990.

0000

2,32

8.49

20

2,32

8.49

200.

2110

0.00

002,

332.

923

7

2018

3.50

193.

3475

13.1

507

0.02

872.

0635

0.05

192.

1155

0.71

340.

0486

0.76

200.

0000

2,24

6.94

12

2,24

6.94

120.

1871

0.00

002,

250.

870

9

Tota

l4.

7386

9.56

1037

.382

70.

0771

5.58

410.

1486

5.73

272.

0045

0.13

932.

1438

0.00

006,

237.

130

86,

237.

1308

0.60

400.

0000

6,24

9.81

54

RO

GN

Ox

CO

SO2

Fugi

tive

PM10

Exha

ust

PM10

PM10

To

tal

Fugi

tive

PM2.

5Ex

haus

t PM

2.5

PM2.

5 To

tal

Bio

- CO

2N

Bio

-CO

2To

tal C

O2

CH

4N

20C

O2e

Perc

ent

Red

uctio

n26

.74

64.4

22.

340.

000.

000.

000.

0033

.71

87.8

440

.57

43.7

187

.93

54.5

30.

000.

000.

00

3.0

Con

stru

ctio

n D

etai

l

Con

stru

ctio

n Ph

ase

Pha

se

Num

ber

Pha

se N

ame

Pha

se T

ype

Sta

rt D

ate

End

Dat

eN

um D

ays

Wee

kN

um D

ays

Pha

se D

escr

iptio

n

11

Gra

ding

Gra

ding

2/17

/201

65/

31/2

016

575

21a

Gra

ding

Gra

ding

2/17

/201

65/

31/2

016

575

32

Con

cret

e-C

ontin

uous

Site

Pre

para

tion

6/1/

2016

6/2/

2016

52

42a

Con

cret

e-C

ontin

uous

Site

Pre

para

tion

6/1/

2016

6/2/

2016

52

53

Con

cret

e-N

orm

alS

ite P

repa

ratio

n6/

3/20

164/

15/2

018

548

6

63a

Con

cret

e-N

orm

alS

ite P

repa

ratio

n6/

3/20

164/

15/2

018

548

6

74

Bui

ldin

g C

onst

ruct

ion

Bui

ldin

g C

onst

ruct

ion

6/3/

2016

12/1

5/20

185

661

84a

Bui

ldin

g C

onst

ruct

ion

Bui

ldin

g C

onst

ruct

ion

6/3/

2016

12/1

5/20

185

661

95

Arc

hite

ctur

al C

oatin

gA

rchi

tect

ural

Coa

ting

5/16

/201

812

/15/

2018

515

3

106

Pav

ing

Pav

ing

11/1

6/20

1812

/31/

2018

532

Acr

es o

f Gra

ding

(Site

Pre

para

tion

Phas

e): 0

Acr

es o

f Gra

ding

(Gra

ding

Pha

se):

0

Acr

es o

f Pav

ing:

0

Res

iden

tial I

ndoo

r: 1

,721

,250

; Res

iden

tial O

utdo

or: 0

; Non

-Res

iden

tial I

ndoo

r: 1

99,6

50; N

on-R

esid

entia

l Out

door

: 39,

240

(Arc

hite

ctur

al

OffR

oad

Equi

pmen

t

Pha

se N

ame

Offr

oad

Equ

ipm

ent T

ype

Am

ount

Usa

ge H

ours

Hor

se P

ower

Load

Fac

tor

1 G

radi

ngE

xcav

ator

s4

8.00

162

0.38

1 G

radi

ngG

rade

rs2

8.00

200

0.36

1 G

radi

ngR

ubbe

r T

ired

Doz

ers

18.

0025

50.

40

1 G

radi

ngT

ract

ors/

Load

ers/

Bac

khoe

s2

8.00

970.

37

1a G

radi

ngE

xcav

ator

s1

8.00

167

0.40

1a G

radi

ngG

rade

rs2

8.00

205

0.50

1a G

radi

ngR

ubbe

r T

ired

Doz

ers

08.

0022

60.

29

1a G

radi

ngT

ract

ors/

Load

ers/

Bac

khoe

s0

8.00

970.

37

2 C

oncr

ete-

Con

tinuo

usR

ubbe

r T

ired

Doz

ers

114

.00

255

0.40

2 C

oncr

ete-

Con

tinuo

usT

ract

ors/

Load

ers/

Bac

khoe

s1

14.0

097

0.37

2a C

oncr

ete-

Con

tinuo

usR

ubbe

r T

ired

Doz

ers

114

.00

200

0.36

2a C

oncr

ete-

Con

tinuo

usT

ract

ors/

Load

ers/

Bac

khoe

s0

14.0

084

0.74

3 C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

Rub

ber

Tire

d D

ozer

s1

8.00

255

0.40

3 C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

Tra

ctor

s/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes

08.

0097

0.37

3a C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

Rub

ber

Tire

d D

ozer

s0

8.00

255

0.40

3a C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

Tra

ctor

s/Lo

ader

s/B

ackh

oes

08.

0084

0.74

4 B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

nC

rane

s0

7.00

226

0.29

4 B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

nF

orkl

ifts

18.

0089

0.20

4 B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

nG

ener

ator

Set

s1

8.00

840.

74

4 B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

nT

ract

ors/

Load

ers/

Bac

khoe

s2

7.00

970.

37

4 B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

nW

elde

rs2

8.00

650.

37

4a B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

nC

rane

s1

8.00

200

0.36

4a B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

nF

orkl

ifts

08.

0084

0.74

4a B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

nG

ener

ator

Set

s1

8.00

810.

73

4a B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

nT

ract

ors/

Load

ers/

Bac

khoe

s2

8.00

171

0.42

4a B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

nW

elde

rs2

8.00

620.

31

5 A

rchi

tect

ural

Coa

ting

Air

Com

pres

sors

16.

0078

0.48

6 P

avin

gC

emen

t and

Mor

tar

Mix

ers

16.

009

0.56

6 P

avin

gP

aver

s1

8.00

125

0.42

6 P

avin

gP

avin

g E

quip

men

t1

6.00

130

0.36

6 P

avin

gR

olle

rs1

6.00

800.

38

6 P

avin

gT

ract

ors/

Load

ers/

Bac

khoe

s1

8.00

970.

37

Trip

s an

d VM

T

Pha

se N

ame

Offr

oad

Equ

ipm

ent

Cou

ntW

orke

r T

rip

Num

ber

Ven

dor

Trip

N

umbe

rH

aulin

g T

rip

Num

ber

Wor

ker

Trip

Le

ngth

Ven

dor

Trip

Le

ngth

Hau

ling

Trip

Le

ngth

Wor

ker

Veh

icle

C

lass

Ven

dor

Veh

icle

Cla

ssH

aulin

g V

ehic

le C

lass

1 G

radi

ng9

23.0

04.

000.

0014

.70

6.90

20.0

0LD

_Mix

HD

T_M

ixH

HD

T

1a G

radi

ng3

8.00

0.00

0.00

14.7

06.

9020

.00

LD_M

ixH

DT

_Mix

HH

DT

2 C

oncr

ete-

Con

tinuo

us2

5.00

4.00

0.00

14.7

06.

9020

.00

LD_M

ixH

DT

_Mix

HH

DT

2a C

oncr

ete-

Con

tinuo

us1

23.0

00.

000.

0014

.70

6.90

20.0

0LD

_Mix

HD

T_M

ixH

HD

T

3 C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

15.

004.

000.

0014

.70

6.90

20.0

0LD

_Mix

HD

T_M

ixH

HD

T

3a C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

023

.00

0.00

0.00

14.7

06.

9020

.00

LD_M

ixH

DT

_Mix

HH

DT

4 B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

n6

857.

0020

7.00

0.00

14.7

06.

9020

.00

LD_M

ixH

DT

_Mix

HH

DT

4a B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

n6

0.00

0.00

0.00

14.7

06.

9020

.00

LD_M

ixH

DT

_Mix

HH

DT

5 A

rchi

tect

ural

Coa

ting

117

1.00

0.00

0.00

14.7

06.

9020

.00

LD_M

ixH

DT

_Mix

HH

DT

6 P

avin

g5

13.0

00.

000.

0014

.70

6.90

20.0

0LD

_Mix

HD

T_M

ixH

HD

T

Exh

aust

P

M10

PM

10

Tot

al

3.1

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

res

Con

stru

ctio

n

Use

Cle

aner

Eng

ines

for

Con

stru

ctio

n E

quip

men

t

Use

Soi

l Sta

biliz

er

Wat

er E

xpos

ed A

rea

Cle

an P

aved

Roa

ds

3.2

1 G

radi

ng -

2016

NB

io-

CO

2T

otal

CO

2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10C

H4

N2O

CO

2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

Fug

itive

P

M2.

5E

xhau

st

PM

2.5

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

2410

0.00

000.

2410

0.12

640.

0000

0.12

640.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

1681

1.96

821.

2274

1.83

00e-

003

0.09

320.

0932

0.08

580.

0858

0.00

0017

2.47

9417

2.47

940.

0520

0.00

0017

3.57

19

Tota

l0.

1681

1.96

821.

2274

1.83

00e-

003

0.05

200.

0000

173.

5719

0.24

100.

0932

0.33

430.

1264

0.08

580.

2121

0.00

0017

2.47

9417

2.47

94

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

1.33

00e-

003

0.01

350.

0175

3.00

00e-

005

9.20

00e-

004

2.10

00e-

004

1.14

00e-

003

2.60

00e-

004

2.00

00e-

004

4.60

00e-

004

0.00

002.

9564

2.95

642.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

2.95

69

Wor

ker

3.47

00e-

003

5.09

00e-

003

0.05

291.

2000

e-00

49.

4600

e-00

38.

0000

e-00

59.

5400

e-00

32.

5100

e-00

37.

0000

e-00

52.

5900

e-00

30.

0000

8.86

548.

8654

4.80

00e-

004

0.00

008.

8755

Tota

l4.

8000

e-00

30.

0186

0.07

041.

5000

e-00

45.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

11.8

323

0.01

042.

9000

e-00

40.

0107

2.77

00e-

003

2.70

00e-

004

3.05

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0011

.821

911

.821

9

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

0940

0.00

000.

0940

0.04

930.

0000

0.04

930.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0224

0.09

701.

1362

1.83

00e-

003

2.98

00e-

003

2.98

00e-

003

2.98

00e-

003

2.98

00e-

003

0.00

0017

2.47

9217

2.47

920.

0520

0.00

0017

3.57

17

Tota

l0.

0224

0.09

701.

1362

1.83

00e-

003

0.05

200.

0000

173.

5717

0.09

402.

9800

e-00

30.

0970

0.04

932.

9800

e-00

30.

0523

0.00

0017

2.47

9217

2.47

92

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2R

OG

NO

xC

OT

otal

CO

2C

H4

N2O

CO

2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

1.33

00e-

003

0.01

350.

0175

3.00

00e-

005

9.20

00e-

004

2.10

00e-

004

1.14

00e-

003

2.60

00e-

004

2.00

00e-

004

4.60

00e-

004

0.00

002.

9564

2.95

642.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

2.95

69

Wor

ker

3.47

00e-

003

5.09

00e-

003

0.05

291.

2000

e-00

49.

4600

e-00

38.

0000

e-00

59.

5400

e-00

32.

5100

e-00

37.

0000

e-00

52.

5900

e-00

30.

0000

8.86

548.

8654

4.80

00e-

004

0.00

008.

8755

Tota

l4.

8000

e-00

30.

0186

0.07

041.

5000

e-00

45.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

11.8

323

0.01

042.

9000

e-00

40.

0107

2.77

00e-

003

2.70

00e-

004

3.05

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0011

.821

911

.821

9

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.3

1a G

radi

ng -

2016

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t1.

9100

e-00

30.

0000

1.91

00e-

003

2.10

00e-

004

0.00

002.

1000

e-00

40.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0698

0.94

810.

3373

8.80

00e-

004

0.03

380.

0338

0.03

110.

0311

0.00

0083

.238

983

.238

90.

0251

0.00

0083

.766

2

Tota

l0.

0698

0.94

810.

3373

8.80

00e-

004

0.02

510.

0000

83.7

662

1.91

00e-

003

0.03

380.

0357

2.10

00e-

004

0.03

110.

0313

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0083

.238

983

.238

9

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

1.21

00e-

003

1.77

00e-

003

0.01

844.

0000

e-00

53.

2900

e-00

33.

0000

e-00

53.

3200

e-00

38.

7000

e-00

43.

0000

e-00

59.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

3.08

363.

0836

1.70

00e-

004

0.00

003.

0871

Tota

l1.

2100

e-00

31.

7700

e-00

30.

0184

4.00

00e-

005

1.70

00e-

004

0.00

003.

0871

3.29

00e-

003

3.00

00e-

005

3.32

00e-

003

8.70

00e-

004

3.00

00e-

005

9.00

00e-

004

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

003.

0836

3.08

36

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t7.

4000

e-00

40.

0000

7.40

00e-

004

8.00

00e-

005

0.00

008.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0108

0.04

670.

4618

8.80

00e-

004

1.44

00e-

003

1.44

00e-

003

1.44

00e-

003

1.44

00e-

003

0.00

0083

.238

883

.238

80.

0251

0.00

0083

.766

1

Tota

l0.

0108

0.04

670.

4618

8.80

00e-

004

0.02

510.

0000

83.7

661

7.40

00e-

004

1.44

00e-

003

2.18

00e-

003

8.00

00e-

005

1.44

00e-

003

1.52

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0083

.238

883

.238

8

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

1.21

00e-

003

1.77

00e-

003

0.01

844.

0000

e-00

53.

2900

e-00

33.

0000

e-00

53.

3200

e-00

38.

7000

e-00

43.

0000

e-00

59.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

3.08

363.

0836

1.70

00e-

004

0.00

003.

0871

Tota

l1.

2100

e-00

31.

7700

e-00

30.

0184

4.00

00e-

005

1.70

00e-

004

0.00

003.

0871

3.29

00e-

003

3.00

00e-

005

3.32

00e-

003

8.70

00e-

004

3.00

00e-

005

9.00

00e-

004

0.00

003.

0836

3.08

36

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2

3.4

2 C

oncr

ete-

Con

tinuo

us -

2016

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

0105

0.00

000.

0105

5.79

00e-

003

0.00

005.

7900

e-00

30.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d2.

7600

e-00

30.

0300

0.02

262.

0000

e-00

51.

5700

e-00

31.

5700

e-00

31.

4400

e-00

31.

4400

e-00

30.

0000

1.97

991.

9799

6.00

00e-

004

0.00

001.

9924

Tota

l2.

7600

e-00

30.

0300

0.02

262.

0000

e-00

56.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

1.99

240.

0105

1.57

00e-

003

0.01

215.

7900

e-00

31.

4400

e-00

37.

2300

e-00

3

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

001.

9799

1.97

99

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

4.00

00e-

005

3.60

00e-

004

4.70

00e-

004

0.00

002.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

53.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

0.07

880.

0788

0.00

000.

0000

0.07

89

Wor

ker

2.00

00e-

005

3.00

00e-

005

3.10

00e-

004

0.00

005.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

6.00

00e-

005

1.00

00e-

005

0.00

001.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

0.05

140.

0514

0.00

000.

0000

0.05

15

Tota

l6.

0000

e-00

53.

9000

e-00

47.

8000

e-00

40.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.13

037.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

59.

0000

e-00

52.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

52.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

0.13

020.

1302

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2R

OG

NO

xC

OT

otal

CO

2C

H4

N2O

CO

2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t4.

1100

e-00

30.

0000

4.11

00e-

003

2.26

00e-

003

0.00

002.

2600

e-00

30.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d2.

6000

e-00

41.

1100

e-00

30.

0110

2.00

00e-

005

3.00

00e-

005

3.00

00e-

005

3.00

00e-

005

3.00

00e-

005

0.00

001.

9799

1.97

996.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

1.99

24

Tota

l2.

6000

e-00

41.

1100

e-00

30.

0110

2.00

00e-

005

6.00

00e-

004

0.00

001.

9924

4.11

00e-

003

3.00

00e-

005

4.14

00e-

003

2.26

00e-

003

3.00

00e-

005

2.29

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

001.

9799

1.97

99

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

4.00

00e-

005

3.60

00e-

004

4.70

00e-

004

0.00

002.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

53.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

0.07

880.

0788

0.00

000.

0000

0.07

89

Wor

ker

2.00

00e-

005

3.00

00e-

005

3.10

00e-

004

0.00

005.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

6.00

00e-

005

1.00

00e-

005

0.00

001.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

0.05

140.

0514

0.00

000.

0000

0.05

15

Tota

l6.

0000

e-00

53.

9000

e-00

47.

8000

e-00

40.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.13

037.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

59.

0000

e-00

52.

0000

e-00

51.

0000

e-00

52.

0000

e-00

5

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

1302

0.13

02

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.5

2a C

oncr

ete-

Con

tinuo

us -

2016

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

0105

0.00

000.

0105

5.79

00e-

003

0.00

005.

7900

e-00

30.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d1.

6300

e-00

30.

0178

6.07

00e-

003

1.00

00e-

005

8.80

00e-

004

8.80

00e-

004

8.10

00e-

004

8.10

00e-

004

0.00

001.

0271

1.02

713.

1000

e-00

40.

0000

1.03

36

Tota

l1.

6300

e-00

30.

0178

6.07

00e-

003

1.00

00e-

005

3.10

00e-

004

0.00

001.

0336

0.01

058.

8000

e-00

40.

0114

5.79

00e-

003

8.10

00e-

004

6.60

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

001.

0271

1.02

71

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

9.00

00e-

005

1.40

00e-

004

1.41

00e-

003

0.00

002.

5000

e-00

40.

0000

2.50

00e-

004

7.00

00e-

005

0.00

007.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

0.23

640.

2364

1.00

00e-

005

0.00

000.

2367

Tota

l9.

0000

e-00

51.

4000

e-00

41.

4100

e-00

30.

0000

1.00

00e-

005

0.00

000.

2367

2.50

00e-

004

0.00

002.

5000

e-00

47.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

7.00

00e-

005

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

2364

0.23

64

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t4.

1100

e-00

30.

0000

4.11

00e-

003

2.26

00e-

003

0.00

002.

2600

e-00

30.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d1.

3000

e-00

45.

8000

e-00

44.

8900

e-00

31.

0000

e-00

52.

0000

e-00

52.

0000

e-00

52.

0000

e-00

52.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

1.02

711.

0271

3.10

00e-

004

0.00

001.

0336

Tota

l1.

3000

e-00

45.

8000

e-00

44.

8900

e-00

31.

0000

e-00

53.

1000

e-00

40.

0000

1.03

364.

1100

e-00

32.

0000

e-00

54.

1300

e-00

32.

2600

e-00

32.

0000

e-00

52.

2800

e-00

30.

0000

1.02

711.

0271

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

9.00

00e-

005

1.40

00e-

004

1.41

00e-

003

0.00

002.

5000

e-00

40.

0000

2.50

00e-

004

7.00

00e-

005

0.00

007.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

0.23

640.

2364

1.00

00e-

005

0.00

000.

2367

Tota

l9.

0000

e-00

51.

4000

e-00

41.

4100

e-00

30.

0000

1.00

00e-

005

0.00

000.

2367

2.50

00e-

004

0.00

002.

5000

e-00

47.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

7.00

00e-

005

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

2364

0.23

64

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.6

3 C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

- 20

16U

nmiti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t1.

4634

0.00

001.

4634

0.80

440.

0000

0.80

440.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0935

1.04

720.

7916

6.70

00e-

004

0.04

870.

0487

0.04

480.

0448

0.00

0063

.248

163

.248

10.

0191

0.00

0063

.648

8

Tota

l0.

0935

1.04

720.

7916

6.70

00e-

004

0.01

910.

0000

63.6

488

1.46

340.

0487

1.51

210.

8044

0.04

480.

8492

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0063

.248

163

.248

1

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

2.68

00e-

003

0.02

730.

0352

7.00

00e-

005

1.86

00e-

003

4.30

00e-

004

2.29

00e-

003

5.30

00e-

004

4.00

00e-

004

9.30

00e-

004

0.00

005.

9523

5.95

234.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

5.95

32

Wor

ker

1.52

00e-

003

2.23

00e-

003

0.02

325.

0000

e-00

54.

1400

e-00

34.

0000

e-00

54.

1800

e-00

31.

1000

e-00

33.

0000

e-00

51.

1300

e-00

30.

0000

3.88

023.

8802

2.10

00e-

004

0.00

003.

8846

Tota

l4.

2000

e-00

30.

0295

0.05

831.

2000

e-00

42.

5000

e-00

40.

0000

9.83

786.

0000

e-00

34.

7000

e-00

46.

4700

e-00

31.

6300

e-00

34.

3000

e-00

42.

0600

e-00

3

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

009.

8325

9.83

25

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

5707

0.00

000.

5707

0.31

370.

0000

0.31

370.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d8.

1500

e-00

30.

0353

0.29

886.

7000

e-00

41.

0900

e-00

31.

0900

e-00

31.

0900

e-00

31.

0900

e-00

30.

0000

63.2

481

63.2

481

0.01

910.

0000

63.6

487

Tota

l8.

1500

e-00

30.

0353

0.29

886.

7000

e-00

40.

0191

0.00

0063

.648

70.

5707

1.09

00e-

003

0.57

180.

3137

1.09

00e-

003

0.31

48

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0063

.248

163

.248

1

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

2.68

00e-

003

0.02

730.

0352

7.00

00e-

005

1.86

00e-

003

4.30

00e-

004

2.29

00e-

003

5.30

00e-

004

4.00

00e-

004

9.30

00e-

004

0.00

005.

9523

5.95

234.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

5.95

32

Wor

ker

1.52

00e-

003

2.23

00e-

003

0.02

325.

0000

e-00

54.

1400

e-00

34.

0000

e-00

54.

1800

e-00

31.

1000

e-00

33.

0000

e-00

51.

1300

e-00

30.

0000

3.88

023.

8802

2.10

00e-

004

0.00

003.

8846

Tota

l4.

2000

e-00

30.

0295

0.05

831.

2000

e-00

42.

5000

e-00

40.

0000

9.83

786.

0000

e-00

34.

7000

e-00

46.

4700

e-00

31.

6300

e-00

34.

3000

e-00

42.

0600

e-00

3

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

009.

8325

9.83

25

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.6

3 C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

- 20

17U

nmiti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t1.

4634

0.00

001.

4634

0.80

440.

0000

0.80

440.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

1547

1.71

511.

2923

1.16

00e-

003

0.07

970.

0797

0.07

330.

0733

0.00

0010

7.32

1010

7.32

100.

0329

0.00

0010

8.01

15

Tota

l0.

1547

1.71

511.

2923

1.16

00e-

003

0.03

290.

0000

108.

0115

1.46

340.

0797

1.54

300.

8044

0.07

330.

8777

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0010

7.32

1010

7.32

10

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

4.22

00e-

003

0.04

270.

0574

1.10

00e-

004

3.20

00e-

003

6.60

00e-

004

3.86

00e-

003

9.10

00e-

004

6.10

00e-

004

1.52

00e-

003

0.00

0010

.082

910

.082

97.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

10.0

844

Wor

ker

2.34

00e-

003

3.46

00e-

003

0.03

609.

0000

e-00

57.

1300

e-00

36.

0000

e-00

57.

1900

e-00

31.

8900

e-00

35.

0000

e-00

51.

9500

e-00

30.

0000

6.42

476.

4247

3.30

00e-

004

0.00

006.

4316

Tota

l6.

5600

e-00

30.

0462

0.09

332.

0000

e-00

44.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

16.5

160

0.01

037.

2000

e-00

40.

0111

2.80

00e-

003

6.60

00e-

004

3.47

00e-

003

0.00

0016

.507

616

.507

6

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

5707

0.00

000.

5707

0.31

370.

0000

0.31

370.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0140

0.06

080.

5145

1.16

00e-

003

1.87

00e-

003

1.87

00e-

003

1.87

00e-

003

1.87

00e-

003

0.00

0010

7.32

0910

7.32

090.

0329

0.00

0010

8.01

14

Tota

l0.

0140

0.06

080.

5145

1.16

00e-

003

0.03

290.

0000

108.

0114

0.57

071.

8700

e-00

30.

5726

0.31

371.

8700

e-00

30.

3156

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0010

7.32

0910

7.32

09

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

4.22

00e-

003

0.04

270.

0574

1.10

00e-

004

3.20

00e-

003

6.60

00e-

004

3.86

00e-

003

9.10

00e-

004

6.10

00e-

004

1.52

00e-

003

0.00

0010

.082

910

.082

97.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

10.0

844

Wor

ker

2.34

00e-

003

3.46

00e-

003

0.03

609.

0000

e-00

57.

1300

e-00

36.

0000

e-00

57.

1900

e-00

31.

8900

e-00

35.

0000

e-00

51.

9500

e-00

30.

0000

6.42

476.

4247

3.30

00e-

004

0.00

006.

4316

Tota

l6.

5600

e-00

30.

0462

0.09

332.

0000

e-00

44.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

16.5

160

0.01

037.

2000

e-00

40.

0111

2.80

00e-

003

6.60

00e-

004

3.47

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0016

.507

616

.507

6

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.6

3 C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

- 20

18U

nmiti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

Fug

itive

Dus

t1.

4634

0.00

001.

4634

0.80

440.

0000

0.80

440.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0404

0.43

860.

3361

3.30

00e-

004

0.02

030.

0203

0.01

860.

0186

0.00

0030

.489

030

.489

09.

4900

e-00

30.

0000

30.6

883

Tota

l0.

0404

0.43

860.

3361

3.30

00e-

004

9.49

00e-

003

0.00

0030

.688

31.

4634

0.02

031.

4836

0.80

440.

0186

0.82

30

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0030

.489

030

.489

0

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

1.14

00e-

003

0.01

130.

0159

3.00

00e-

005

9.20

00e-

004

1.80

00e-

004

1.10

00e-

003

2.60

00e-

004

1.70

00e-

004

4.30

00e-

004

0.00

002.

8597

2.85

972.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

2.86

01

Wor

ker

6.10

00e-

004

9.10

00e-

004

9.39

00e-

003

3.00

00e-

005

2.06

00e-

003

2.00

00e-

005

2.07

00e-

003

5.50

00e-

004

2.00

00e-

005

5.60

00e-

004

0.00

001.

7841

1.78

419.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

1.78

60

Tota

l1.

7500

e-00

30.

0122

0.02

526.

0000

e-00

51.

1000

e-00

40.

0000

4.64

612.

9800

e-00

32.

0000

e-00

43.

1700

e-00

38.

1000

e-00

41.

9000

e-00

49.

9000

e-00

4

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

004.

6438

4.64

38

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

5707

0.00

000.

5707

0.31

370.

0000

0.31

370.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d4.

0500

e-00

30.

0175

0.14

843.

3000

e-00

45.

4000

e-00

45.

4000

e-00

45.

4000

e-00

45.

4000

e-00

40.

0000

30.4

890

30.4

890

9.49

00e-

003

0.00

0030

.688

3

Tota

l4.

0500

e-00

30.

0175

0.14

843.

3000

e-00

49.

4900

e-00

30.

0000

30.6

883

0.57

075.

4000

e-00

40.

5713

0.31

375.

4000

e-00

40.

3143

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0030

.489

030

.489

0

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

1.14

00e-

003

0.01

130.

0159

3.00

00e-

005

9.20

00e-

004

1.80

00e-

004

1.10

00e-

003

2.60

00e-

004

1.70

00e-

004

4.30

00e-

004

0.00

002.

8597

2.85

972.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

2.86

01

Wor

ker

6.10

00e-

004

9.10

00e-

004

9.39

00e-

003

3.00

00e-

005

2.06

00e-

003

2.00

00e-

005

2.07

00e-

003

5.50

00e-

004

2.00

00e-

005

5.60

00e-

004

0.00

001.

7841

1.78

419.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

1.78

60

Tota

l1.

7500

e-00

30.

0122

0.02

526.

0000

e-00

51.

1000

e-00

40.

0000

4.64

612.

9800

e-00

32.

0000

e-00

43.

1700

e-00

38.

1000

e-00

41.

9000

e-00

49.

9000

e-00

4

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

004.

6438

4.64

38

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.7

3a C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

- 20

16U

nmiti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2R

OG

NO

xC

OT

otal

CO

2C

H4

N2O

CO

2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

6.98

00e-

003

0.01

030.

1066

2.30

00e-

004

0.01

911.

6000

e-00

40.

0192

5.06

00e-

003

1.50

00e-

004

5.21

00e-

003

0.00

0017

.849

017

.849

09.

6000

e-00

40.

0000

17.8

692

Tota

l6.

9800

e-00

30.

0103

0.10

662.

3000

e-00

49.

6000

e-00

40.

0000

17.8

692

0.01

911.

6000

e-00

40.

0192

5.06

00e-

003

1.50

00e-

004

5.21

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0017

.849

017

.849

0

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

6.98

00e-

003

0.01

030.

1066

2.30

00e-

004

0.01

911.

6000

e-00

40.

0192

5.06

00e-

003

1.50

00e-

004

5.21

00e-

003

0.00

0017

.849

017

.849

09.

6000

e-00

40.

0000

17.8

692

Tota

l6.

9800

e-00

30.

0103

0.10

662.

3000

e-00

49.

6000

e-00

40.

0000

17.8

692

0.01

911.

6000

e-00

40.

0192

5.06

00e-

003

1.50

00e-

004

5.21

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0017

.849

017

.849

0

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.7

3a C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

- 20

17U

nmiti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

0.01

080.

0159

0.16

554.

0000

e-00

40.

0328

2.70

00e-

004

0.03

318.

7100

e-00

32.

5000

e-00

48.

9600

e-00

30.

0000

29.5

535

29.5

535

1.53

00e-

003

0.00

0029

.585

5

Tota

l0.

0108

0.01

590.

1655

4.00

00e-

004

1.53

00e-

003

0.00

0029

.585

50.

0328

2.70

00e-

004

0.03

318.

7100

e-00

32.

5000

e-00

48.

9600

e-00

3

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0029

.553

529

.553

5

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

0.01

080.

0159

0.16

554.

0000

e-00

40.

0328

2.70

00e-

004

0.03

318.

7100

e-00

32.

5000

e-00

48.

9600

e-00

30.

0000

29.5

535

29.5

535

1.53

00e-

003

0.00

0029

.585

5

Tota

l0.

0108

0.01

590.

1655

4.00

00e-

004

1.53

00e-

003

0.00

0029

.585

50.

0328

2.70

00e-

004

0.03

318.

7100

e-00

32.

5000

e-00

48.

9600

e-00

30.

0000

29.5

535

29.5

535

3.7

3a C

oncr

ete-

Nor

mal

- 20

18U

nmiti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2R

OG

NO

xC

OT

otal

CO

2C

H4

N2O

CO

2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

2.79

00e-

003

4.17

00e-

003

0.04

321.

2000

e-00

49.

4600

e-00

38.

0000

e-00

59.

5400

e-00

32.

5100

e-00

37.

0000

e-00

52.

5800

e-00

30.

0000

8.20

698.

2069

4.10

00e-

004

0.00

008.

2154

Tota

l2.

7900

e-00

34.

1700

e-00

30.

0432

1.20

00e-

004

4.10

00e-

004

0.00

008.

2154

9.46

00e-

003

8.00

00e-

005

9.54

00e-

003

2.51

00e-

003

7.00

00e-

005

2.58

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

008.

2069

8.20

69

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

2.79

00e-

003

4.17

00e-

003

0.04

321.

2000

e-00

49.

4600

e-00

38.

0000

e-00

59.

5400

e-00

32.

5100

e-00

37.

0000

e-00

52.

5800

e-00

30.

0000

8.20

698.

2069

4.10

00e-

004

0.00

008.

2154

Tota

l2.

7900

e-00

34.

1700

e-00

30.

0432

1.20

00e-

004

4.10

00e-

004

0.00

008.

2154

9.46

00e-

003

8.00

00e-

005

9.54

00e-

003

2.51

00e-

003

7.00

00e-

005

2.58

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

008.

2069

8.20

69

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.8

4 B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

n - 2

016

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

1552

1.24

310.

9386

1.41

00e-

003

0.09

500.

0950

0.09

140.

0914

0.00

0012

5.36

1912

5.36

190.

0226

0.00

0012

5.83

54

Tota

l0.

1552

1.24

310.

9386

1.41

00e-

003

0.02

260.

0000

125.

8354

0.09

500.

0950

0.09

140.

0914

0.00

0012

5.36

1912

5.36

19

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.13

861.

4110

1.81

893.

3900

e-00

30.

0962

0.02

230.

1185

0.02

750.

0205

0.04

800.

0000

308.

0312

308.

0312

2.23

00e-

003

0.00

0030

8.07

81

Wor

ker

0.26

010.

3820

3.97

028.

7200

e-00

30.

7099

6.04

00e-

003

0.71

590.

1885

5.56

00e-

003

0.19

410.

0000

665.

0708

665.

0708

0.03

580.

0000

665.

8230

Tota

l0.

3987

1.79

315.

7891

0.01

210.

0381

0.00

0097

3.90

110.

8060

0.02

840.

8344

0.21

600.

0261

0.24

21

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0097

3.10

2097

3.10

20

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

0191

0.22

490.

9404

1.41

00e-

003

2.03

00e-

003

2.03

00e-

003

2.03

00e-

003

2.03

00e-

003

0.00

0012

5.36

1812

5.36

180.

0226

0.00

0012

5.83

52

Tota

l0.

0191

0.22

490.

9404

1.41

00e-

003

0.02

260.

0000

125.

8352

2.03

00e-

003

2.03

00e-

003

2.03

00e-

003

2.03

00e-

003

0.00

0012

5.36

1812

5.36

18

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2R

OG

NO

xC

OT

otal

CO

2C

H4

N2O

CO

2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.13

861.

4110

1.81

893.

3900

e-00

30.

0962

0.02

230.

1185

0.02

750.

0205

0.04

800.

0000

308.

0312

308.

0312

2.23

00e-

003

0.00

0030

8.07

81

Wor

ker

0.26

010.

3820

3.97

028.

7200

e-00

30.

7099

6.04

00e-

003

0.71

590.

1885

5.56

00e-

003

0.19

410.

0000

665.

0708

665.

0708

0.03

580.

0000

665.

8230

Tota

l0.

3987

1.79

315.

7891

0.01

210.

0381

0.00

0097

3.90

110.

8060

0.02

840.

8344

0.21

600.

0261

0.24

21

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0097

3.10

2097

3.10

20

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.8

4 B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

n - 2

017

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

2431

1.98

761.

6028

2.42

00e-

003

0.14

730.

1473

0.14

160.

1416

0.00

0021

4.44

6921

4.44

690.

0373

0.00

0021

5.23

06

Tota

l0.

2431

1.98

761.

6028

2.42

00e-

003

0.03

730.

0000

215.

2306

0.14

730.

1473

0.14

160.

1416

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0021

4.44

6921

4.44

69

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.21

822.

2095

2.96

785.

8300

e-00

30.

1656

0.03

430.

1999

0.04

730.

0315

0.07

880.

0000

521.

7896

521.

7896

3.72

00e-

003

0.00

0052

1.86

77

Wor

ker

0.40

100.

5938

6.16

500.

0150

1.22

230.

0100

1.23

230.

3246

9.24

00e-

003

0.33

390.

0000

1,10

1.18

79

1,10

1.18

790.

0569

0.00

001,

102.

383

1

Tota

l0.

6192

2.80

329.

1328

0.02

080.

0606

0.00

001,

624.

250

81.

3879

0.04

431.

4322

0.37

190.

0408

0.41

27

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

001,

622.

977

51,

622.

9775

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

0329

0.38

731.

6192

2.42

00e-

003

3.50

00e-

003

3.50

00e-

003

3.50

00e-

003

3.50

00e-

003

0.00

0021

4.44

6621

4.44

660.

0373

0.00

0021

5.23

04

Tota

l0.

0329

0.38

731.

6192

2.42

00e-

003

0.03

730.

0000

215.

2304

3.50

00e-

003

3.50

00e-

003

3.50

00e-

003

3.50

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0021

4.44

6621

4.44

66

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.21

822.

2095

2.96

785.

8300

e-00

30.

1656

0.03

430.

1999

0.04

730.

0315

0.07

880.

0000

521.

7896

521.

7896

3.72

00e-

003

0.00

0052

1.86

77

Wor

ker

0.40

100.

5938

6.16

500.

0150

1.22

230.

0100

1.23

230.

3246

9.24

00e-

003

0.33

390.

0000

1,10

1.18

79

1,10

1.18

790.

0569

0.00

001,

102.

383

1

Tota

l0.

6192

2.80

329.

1328

0.02

080.

0606

0.00

001,

624.

250

81.

3879

0.04

431.

4322

0.37

190.

0408

0.41

270.

0000

1,62

2.97

75

1,62

2.97

75

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2

3.8

4 B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

n - 2

018

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

2035

1.70

831.

5178

2.33

00e-

003

0.12

000.

1200

0.11

550.

1155

0.00

0020

4.82

9920

4.82

990.

0347

0.00

0020

5.55

77

Tota

l0.

2035

1.70

831.

5178

2.33

00e-

003

0.03

470.

0000

205.

5577

0.12

000.

1200

0.11

550.

1155

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0020

4.82

9920

4.82

99

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.19

631.

9488

2.73

395.

6000

e-00

30.

1593

0.03

110.

1903

0.04

550.

0286

0.07

400.

0000

493.

2979

493.

2979

3.56

00e-

003

0.00

0049

3.37

26

Wor

ker

0.34

630.

5179

5.36

750.

0144

1.17

539.

3700

e-00

31.

1847

0.31

218.

6700

e-00

30.

3208

0.00

001,

019.

314

11,

019.

3141

0.05

080.

0000

1,02

0.38

07

Tota

l0.

5425

2.46

668.

1014

0.02

000.

0544

0.00

001,

513.

753

21.

3346

0.04

041.

3750

0.35

760.

0372

0.39

480.

0000

1,51

2.61

20

1,51

2.61

20

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2R

OG

NO

xC

OT

otal

CO

2C

H4

N2O

CO

2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

0316

0.37

241.

5569

2.33

00e-

003

3.37

00e-

003

3.37

00e-

003

3.37

00e-

003

3.37

00e-

003

0.00

0020

4.82

9620

4.82

960.

0347

0.00

0020

5.55

75

Tota

l0.

0316

0.37

241.

5569

2.33

00e-

003

0.03

470.

0000

205.

5575

3.37

00e-

003

3.37

00e-

003

3.37

00e-

003

3.37

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0020

4.82

9620

4.82

96

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.19

631.

9488

2.73

395.

6000

e-00

30.

1593

0.03

110.

1903

0.04

550.

0286

0.07

400.

0000

493.

2979

493.

2979

3.56

00e-

003

0.00

0049

3.37

26

Wor

ker

0.34

630.

5179

5.36

750.

0144

1.17

539.

3700

e-00

31.

1847

0.31

218.

6700

e-00

30.

3208

0.00

001,

019.

314

11,

019.

3141

0.05

080.

0000

1,02

0.38

07

Tota

l0.

5425

2.46

668.

1014

0.02

000.

0544

0.00

001,

513.

753

21.

3346

0.04

041.

3750

0.35

760.

0372

0.39

48

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

001,

512.

612

01,

512.

6120

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.9

4a B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

n - 2

016

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

2159

2.13

271.

3286

2.17

00e-

003

0.11

810.

1181

0.11

210.

1121

0.00

0019

8.30

7519

8.30

750.

0463

0.00

0019

9.27

88

Tota

l0.

2159

2.13

271.

3286

2.17

00e-

003

0.04

630.

0000

199.

2788

0.11

810.

1181

0.11

210.

1121

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0019

8.30

7519

8.30

75

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

0281

0.23

541.

3993

2.17

00e-

003

3.34

00e-

003

3.34

00e-

003

3.34

00e-

003

3.34

00e-

003

0.00

0019

8.30

7319

8.30

730.

0463

0.00

0019

9.27

86

Tota

l0.

0281

0.23

541.

3993

2.17

00e-

003

0.04

630.

0000

199.

2786

3.34

00e-

003

3.34

00e-

003

3.34

00e-

003

3.34

00e-

003

0.00

0019

8.30

7319

8.30

73

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.9

4a B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

n - 2

017

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

3350

3.30

962.

2379

3.74

00e-

003

0.18

040.

1804

0.17

120.

1712

0.00

0033

7.68

6433

7.68

640.

0783

0.00

0033

9.33

00

Tota

l0.

3350

3.30

962.

2379

3.74

00e-

003

0.07

830.

0000

339.

3300

0.18

040.

1804

0.17

120.

1712

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0033

7.68

6433

7.68

64

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

0484

0.40

532.

4095

3.74

00e-

003

5.75

00e-

003

5.75

00e-

003

5.75

00e-

003

5.75

00e-

003

0.00

0033

7.68

6033

7.68

600.

0783

0.00

0033

9.32

95

Tota

l0.

0484

0.40

532.

4095

3.74

00e-

003

0.07

830.

0000

339.

3295

5.75

00e-

003

5.75

00e-

003

5.75

00e-

003

5.75

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0033

7.68

6033

7.68

60

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.9

4a B

uild

ing

Con

stru

ctio

n - 2

018

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

2786

2.74

602.

0870

3.59

00e-

003

0.14

590.

1459

0.13

870.

1387

0.00

0032

1.21

4032

1.21

400.

0742

0.00

0032

2.77

15

Tota

l0.

2786

2.74

602.

0870

3.59

00e-

003

0.07

420.

0000

322.

7715

0.14

590.

1459

0.13

870.

1387

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0032

1.21

4032

1.21

40

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

0465

0.38

972.

3168

3.59

00e-

003

5.52

00e-

003

5.52

00e-

003

5.52

00e-

003

5.52

00e-

003

0.00

0032

1.21

3632

1.21

360.

0742

0.00

0032

2.77

11

Tota

l0.

0465

0.38

972.

3168

3.59

00e-

003

0.07

420.

0000

322.

7711

5.52

00e-

003

5.52

00e-

003

5.52

00e-

003

5.52

00e-

003

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0032

1.21

3632

1.21

36

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.10

5 A

rchi

tect

ural

Coa

ting

- 201

8U

nmiti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

Arc

hit.

Coa

ting

2.82

490.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0229

0.15

340.

1419

2.30

00e-

004

0.01

150.

0115

0.01

150.

0115

0.00

0019

.532

419

.532

41.

8600

e-00

30.

0000

19.5

714

Tota

l2.

8478

0.15

340.

1419

2.30

00e-

004

1.86

00e-

003

0.00

0019

.571

40.

0115

0.01

150.

0115

0.01

15

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0019

.532

419

.532

4

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

0.04

230.

0632

0.65

551.

7600

e-00

30.

1435

1.14

00e-

003

0.14

470.

0381

1.06

00e-

003

0.03

920.

0000

124.

4729

124.

4729

6.20

00e-

003

0.00

0012

4.60

31

Tota

l0.

0423

0.06

320.

6555

1.76

00e-

003

6.20

00e-

003

0.00

0012

4.60

310.

1435

1.14

00e-

003

0.14

470.

0381

1.06

00e-

003

0.03

92

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0012

4.47

2912

4.47

29

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Arc

hit.

Coa

ting

2.82

490.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d2.

2700

e-00

39.

8500

e-00

30.

1402

2.30

00e-

004

3.00

00e-

004

3.00

00e-

004

3.00

00e-

004

3.00

00e-

004

0.00

0019

.532

419

.532

41.

8600

e-00

30.

0000

19.5

714

Tota

l2.

8272

9.85

00e-

003

0.14

022.

3000

e-00

41.

8600

e-00

30.

0000

19.5

714

3.00

00e-

004

3.00

00e-

004

3.00

00e-

004

3.00

00e-

004

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0019

.532

419

.532

4

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

0.04

230.

0632

0.65

551.

7600

e-00

30.

1435

1.14

00e-

003

0.14

470.

0381

1.06

00e-

003

0.03

920.

0000

124.

4729

124.

4729

6.20

00e-

003

0.00

0012

4.60

31

Tota

l0.

0423

0.06

320.

6555

1.76

00e-

003

6.20

00e-

003

0.00

0012

4.60

310.

1435

1.14

00e-

003

0.14

470.

0381

1.06

00e-

003

0.03

92

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0012

4.47

2912

4.47

29

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

3.11

6 P

avin

g - 2

018

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d0.

0159

0.16

340.

1393

2.10

00e-

004

9.46

00e-

003

9.46

00e-

003

8.72

00e-

003

8.72

00e-

003

0.00

0018

.962

018

.962

05.

7900

e-00

30.

0000

19.0

835

Pav

ing

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Tota

l0.

0159

0.16

340.

1393

2.10

00e-

004

5.79

00e-

003

0.00

0019

.083

59.

4600

e-00

39.

4600

e-00

38.

7200

e-00

38.

7200

e-00

30.

0000

18.9

620

18.9

620

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2R

OG

NO

xC

OT

otal

CO

2C

H4

N2O

CO

2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

6.70

00e-

004

1.01

00e-

003

0.01

043.

0000

e-00

52.

2800

e-00

32.

0000

e-00

52.

3000

e-00

36.

1000

e-00

42.

0000

e-00

56.

2000

e-00

40.

0000

1.97

921.

9792

1.00

00e-

004

0.00

001.

9812

Tota

l6.

7000

e-00

41.

0100

e-00

30.

0104

3.00

00e-

005

1.00

00e-

004

0.00

001.

9812

2.28

00e-

003

2.00

00e-

005

2.30

00e-

003

6.10

00e-

004

2.00

00e-

005

6.20

00e-

004

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

001.

9792

1.97

92

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Off-

Roa

d2.

4800

e-00

30.

0107

0.15

272.

1000

e-00

43.

3000

e-00

43.

3000

e-00

43.

3000

e-00

43.

3000

e-00

40.

0000

18.9

619

18.9

619

5.79

00e-

003

0.00

0019

.083

5

Pav

ing

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Tota

l2.

4800

e-00

30.

0107

0.15

272.

1000

e-00

45.

7900

e-00

30.

0000

19.0

835

3.30

00e-

004

3.30

00e-

004

3.30

00e-

004

3.30

00e-

004

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

0018

.961

918

.961

9

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Ven

dor

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

Wor

ker

6.70

00e-

004

1.01

00e-

003

0.01

043.

0000

e-00

52.

2800

e-00

32.

0000

e-00

52.

3000

e-00

36.

1000

e-00

42.

0000

e-00

56.

2000

e-00

40.

0000

1.97

921.

9792

1.00

00e-

004

0.00

001.

9812

Tota

l6.

7000

e-00

41.

0100

e-00

30.

0104

3.00

00e-

005

1.00

00e-

004

0.00

001.

9812

2.28

00e-

003

2.00

00e-

005

2.30

00e-

003

6.10

00e-

004

2.00

00e-

005

6.20

00e-

004

0.00

001.

9792

1.97

92


A.1.1EmissionsInventoryA.1.1.2 Rehabilitation

RehabilitationEquipmentList


Pal

lad

ium C

on

stru

ctio

n E

qu

ipm

en

t

Co

nst

ruct

ion P

has

eEq

uip

me

nt

Cal

EEM

od E

qu

ipm

en

tFu

el

Nu

mb

er

Hrs

/Day

HP

Load

Reh

abili

tati

on

Aer

ial L

ift

Aer

ial L

ift

Die

sel

1

8

62

0

.31

Reh

abili

tati

on

Du

mp

ers/

Ten

der

sD

um

per

s/Te

nd

ers

Die

sel

1

8

16

0

.38

Cal

EE

Mod

Ver

sion

: Cal

EE

Mod

.201

3.2.

2P

age

1 of

1D

ate:

10/

7/20

15 1

1:33

AM

Palla

dium

Res

iden

ces

- Con

stru

ctio

n (R

ehab

ilita

tion)

Sout

h C

oast

AQ

MD

Air

Dis

tric

t, A

nnua

l

1.0

Proj

ect C

hara

cter

istic

s

1.1

Land

Usa

ge

Land

Use

sS

ize

Met

ricLo

t Acr

eage

Flo

or S

urfa

ce A

rea

Pop

ulat

ion

Use

r D

efin

ed R

ecre

atio

nal

63,3

54.0

0U

ser

Def

ined

Uni

t1.

450.

000

1.2

Oth

er P

roje

ct C

hara

cter

istic

s

Urb

aniz

atio

nU

rban

Win

d Sp

eed

(m/s

)2.

2Pr

ecip

itatio

n Fr

eq (D

ays)

31

Clim

ate

Zone

11O

pera

tiona

l Yea

r20

18

Util

ity C

ompa

nyLo

s A

ngel

es D

epar

tmen

t of W

ater

& P

ower

CO

2 In

tens

ity

(lb/M

Whr

)10

94C

H4

Inte

nsity

(lb

/MW

hr)

0.02

9N

2O In

tens

ity

(lb/M

Whr

)0.

006

1.3

Use

r Ent

ered

Com

men

ts &

Non

-Def

ault

Dat

a

Pro

ject

Cha

ract

eris

tics

- C

O2

Inte

nsity

Fac

tor:

Los

Ang

eles

Dep

artm

ent o

f Wat

er a

nd P

ower

, 201

3 P

ower

Inte

grat

ed R

esou

rce

Pla

n, (

2013

).

Land

Use

- R

ehab

ilita

tion

wor

k em

issi

ons

for

the

Pal

ladi

um.

Con

stru

ctio

n P

hase

- C

onse

rvat

ivel

y as

sum

es r

ehab

ilita

tion

wor

k us

ing

equi

pmen

t em

issi

on fa

ctor

s co

rres

pond

ing

to th

e ea

rlies

t ye

ar o

f Pro

ject

co

nstr

uctio

n (e

.g.,

2015

). A

ctua

l reh

abili

tatio

n w

ork

coul

d oc

cur

durin

g la

ter

year

s.

Off-

road

Equ

ipm

ent -

The

reh

abili

tatio

n w

ork

of th

e hi

stor

ic P

alla

dium

wou

ld c

onsi

st o

f prim

arily

inte

rior

wor

k. A

naly

sis

assu

mes

the

use

of li

mite

d ty

pes

of

equi

pmen

t suc

h as

a li

ft an

d sm

all d

umpe

r/te

nder

.T

rips

and

VM

T -

Incl

udes

2 d

aily

mis

cella

nous

ven

dor

trip

s.

Dem

oliti

on -

Ass

umes

the

raha

bilit

atio

n w

ork

wou

ld g

ener

ate

debr

is e

quiv

alen

t to

appr

oxim

atel

y 10

% o

f the

bui

ldin

g sq

uare

foot

age

(ap

prox

imat

ely

6,33

5 sq

uare

feet

).G

radi

ng -

Arc

hite

ctur

al C

oatin

g -

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-ro

ad E

quip

men

t Miti

gatio

n -

All

equi

pmen

t Tie

r 4

Tab

le N

ame

Col

umn

Nam

eD

efau

lt V

alue

New

Val

ue

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Num

berO

fEqu

ipm

entM

itiga

ted

0.00

1.00

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

Equ

ipM

itiga

tion

Tie

rN

o C

hang

eT

ier

4 F

inal

tblC

onst

ruct

ionP

hase

Num

Day

s20

.00

65.0

0

tblL

andU

seLo

tAcr

eage

0.00

1.45

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

1.00

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

1.00

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

3.00

0.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

OffR

oadE

quip

men

tUni

tAm

ount

0.00

1.00

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Pha

seN

ame

Dem

oliti

on

tblO

ffRoa

dEqu

ipm

ent

Pha

seN

ame

Dem

oliti

on

tblP

roje

ctC

hara

cter

istic

sC

O2I

nten

sity

Fac

tor

1227

.89

1094

tblP

roje

ctC

hara

cter

istic

sO

pera

tiona

lYea

r20

1420

18

0.00

2.00

tblT

ripsA

ndV

MT

Wor

kerT

ripN

umbe

r3.

005.

00

NO

xC

OS

O2

Fug

itive

P

M10

tblT

ripsA

ndV

MT

Ven

dorT

ripN

umbe

r

Fug

itive

P

M2.

5E

xhau

st

PM

2.5

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2

2.0

Emis

sion

s Su

mm

ary

2.1

Ove

rall

Con

stru

ctio

nU

nmiti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

RO

GN

Bio

- C

O2

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Yea

rto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

Exh

aust

P

M10

PM

10

Tot

al

2016

3.89

00e-

003

0.02

630.

0289

7.00

00e-

005

5.55

00e-

003

7.80

00e-

004

6.33

00e-

003

1.13

00e-

003

7.70

00e-

004

1.90

00e-

003

0.00

005.

7247

5.72

473.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

5.73

11

Tota

l3.

8900

e-00

30.

0263

0.02

897.

0000

e-00

53.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

5.73

115.

5500

e-00

37.

8000

e-00

46.

3300

e-00

31.

1300

e-00

37.

7000

e-00

41.

9000

e-00

3

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

005.

7247

5.72

47

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Yea

rto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

2016

1.49

00e-

003

0.01

100.

0207

7.00

00e-

005

5.55

00e-

003

1.70

00e-

004

5.72

00e-

003

1.13

00e-

003

1.60

00e-

004

1.29

00e-

003

0.00

005.

7247

5.72

473.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

5.73

11

Tota

l1.

4900

e-00

30.

0110

0.02

077.

0000

e-00

55.

5500

e-00

31.

7000

e-00

45.

7200

e-00

31.

1300

e-00

31.

6000

e-00

41.

2900

e-00

30.

0000

5.72

475.

7247

3.00

00e-

004

0.00

005.

7311

RO

GN

Ox

CO

SO2

Fugi

tive

PM10

Exha

ust

PM10

PM10

To

tal

Fugi

tive

PM2.

5Ex

haus

t PM

2.5

PM2.

5 To

tal

Bio

- CO

2N

Bio

-CO

2To

tal C

O2

CH

4N

20C

O2e

Perc

ent

Red

uctio

n61

.70

58.0

728

.27

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

78.2

19.

640.

0079

.22

32.1

10.

000.

000.

00

3.0

Con

stru

ctio

n D

etai

l

Con

stru

ctio

n Ph

ase

Pha

se

Num

ber

Pha

se N

ame

Pha

se T

ype

Sta

rt D

ate

End

Dat

eN

um D

ays

Wee

kN

um D

ays

Pha

se D

escr

iptio

n

1D

emol

ition

Dem

oliti

on1/

1/20

163/

31/2

016

565

Acr

es o

f Gra

ding

(Site

Pre

para

tion

Phas

e): 0

Acr

es o

f Gra

ding

(Gra

ding

Pha

se):

0

Acr

es o

f Pav

ing:

0

Res

iden

tial I

ndoo

r: 0

; Res

iden

tial O

utdo

or: 0

; Non

-Res

iden

tial I

ndoo

r: 0

; Non

-Res

iden

tial O

utdo

or: 0

(Arc

hite

ctur

al C

oatin

g –

sqft)

OffR

oad

Equi

pmen

t

Pha

se N

ame

Offr

oad

Equ

ipm

ent T

ype

Am

ount

Usa

ge H

ours

Hor

se P

ower

Load

Fac

tor

Dem

oliti

onA

eria

l Lift

s0

8.00

620.

31

Dem

oliti

onC

oncr

ete/

Indu

stria

l Saw

s0

8.00

810.

73

Dem

oliti

onD

umpe

rs/T

ende

rs1

8.00

160.

38

Dem

oliti

onR

ubbe

r T

ired

Doz

ers

08.

0025

50.

40

Dem

oliti

onT

ract

ors/

Load

ers/

Bac

khoe

s0

8.00

970.

37 Ven

dor

Veh

icle

Cla

ssH

aulin

g V

ehic

le C

lass

Trip

s an

d VM

T

Pha

se N

ame

Offr

oad

Equ

ipm

ent

Cou

ntW

orke

r T

rip

Num

ber

Ven

dor

Trip

N

umbe

rH

aulin

g T

rip

Num

ber

29.0

014

.70

Wor

ker

Trip

Le

ngth

Ven

dor

Trip

Le

ngth

Hau

ling

Trip

Le

ngth

Wor

ker

Veh

icle

C

lass

6.90

20.0

0LD

_Mix

HD

T_M

ixH

HD

T

3.1

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

res

Con

stru

ctio

n

Dem

oliti

on1

5.00

2.00

Use

Cle

aner

Eng

ines

for

Con

stru

ctio

n E

quip

men

t

Cle

an P

aved

Roa

ds

3.2

Dem

oliti

on -

2016

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

n-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M10

T

otal

Fug

itive

P

M2.

5E

xhau

st

PM

2.5

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

Fug

itive

Dus

t3.

1200

e-00

30.

0000

3.12

00e-

003

4.70

00e-

004

0.00

004.

7000

e-00

40.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d2.

4000

e-00

30.

0153

8.16

00e-

003

2.00

00e-

005

6.10

00e-

004

6.10

00e-

004

6.10

00e-

004

6.10

00e-

004

0.00

001.

7967

1.79

672.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

1.80

09

Tota

l2.

4000

e-00

30.

0153

8.16

00e-

003

2.00

00e-

005

3.12

00e-

003

6.10

00e-

004

3.73

00e-

003

4.70

00e-

004

6.10

00e-

004

1.08

00e-

003

0.00

001.

7967

1.79

672.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

1.80

09

Unm

itiga

ted

Con

stru

ctio

n O

ff-Si

te

RO

GN

Ox

CO

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M10

T

otal

Fug

itive

P

M2.

5E

xhau

st

PM

2.5

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

Hau

ling

2.60

00e-

004

4.19

00e-

003

3.17

00e-

003

1.00

00e-

005

2.50

00e-

004

6.00

00e-

005

3.10

00e-

004

7.00

00e-

005

6.00

00e-

005

1.30

00e-

004

0.00

000.

9766

0.97

661.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

0.97

67

Ven

dor

5.80

00e-

004

5.87

00e-

003

7.56

00e-

003

1.00

00e-

005

4.00

00e-

004

9.00

00e-

005

4.90

00e-

004

1.10

00e-

004

9.00

00e-

005

2.00

00e-

004

0.00

001.

2811

1.28

111.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

1.28

13

Wor

ker

6.50

00e-

004

9.60

00e-

004

9.97

00e-

003

2.00

00e-

005

1.78

00e-

003

2.00

00e-

005

1.80

00e-

003

4.70

00e-

004

1.00

00e-

005

4.90

00e-

004

0.00

001.

6703

1.67

039.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

1.67

22

Tota

l1.

4900

e-00

30.

0110

0.02

074.

0000

e-00

51.

1000

e-00

40.

0000

3.93

022.

4300

e-00

31.

7000

e-00

42.

6000

e-00

36.

5000

e-00

41.

6000

e-00

48.

2000

e-00

4

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10

0.00

003.

9280

3.92

80

PM

2.5

Tot

alB

io-

CO

2N

Bio

- C

O2

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

On-

Site

RO

GN

Ox

CO

Tot

al C

O2

CH

4N

2OC

O2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Fug

itive

Dus

t3.

1200

e-00

30.

0000

3.12

00e-

003

4.70

00e-

004

0.00

004.

7000

e-00

40.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

00

Off-

Roa

d0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

2.00

00e-

005

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

0.00

001.

7967

1.79

672.

0000

e-00

40.

0000

1.80

09

Tota

l0.

0000

0.00

000.

0000

2.00

00e-

005

2.00

00e-

004

0.00

001.

8009

3.12

00e-

003

0.00

003.

1200

e-00

34.

7000

e-00

40.

0000

4.70

00e-

004

0.00

001.

7967

1.79

67

Miti

gate

d C

onst

ruct

ion

Off-

Site

SO

2F

ugiti

ve

PM

10E

xhau

st

PM

10P

M2.

5 T

otal

Bio

- C

O2

NB

io-

CO

2R

OG

NO

xC

OT

otal

CO

2C

H4

N2O

CO

2e

Cat

egor

yto

ns/y

rM

T/y

r

PM

10

Tot

alF

ugiti

ve

PM

2.5

Exh

aust

P

M2.

5

Hau

ling

2.60

00e-

004

4.19

00e-

003

3.17

00e-

003

1.00

00e-

005

2.50

00e-

004

6.00

00e-

005

3.10

00e-

004

7.00

00e-

005

6.00

00e-

005

1.30

00e-

004

0.00

000.

9766

0.97

661.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

0.97

67

Ven

dor

5.80

00e-

004

5.87

00e-

003

7.56

00e-

003

1.00

00e-

005

4.00

00e-

004

9.00

00e-

005

4.90

00e-

004

1.10

00e-

004

9.00

00e-

005

2.00

00e-

004

0.00

001.

2811

1.28

111.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

1.28

13

Wor

ker

6.50

00e-

004

9.60

00e-

004

9.97

00e-

003

2.00

00e-

005

1.78

00e-

003

2.00

00e-

005

1.80

00e-

003

4.70

00e-

004

1.00

00e-

005

4.90

00e-

004

0.00

001.

6703

1.67

039.

0000

e-00

50.

0000

1.67

22

Tota

l1.

4900

e-00

30.

0110

0.02

074.

0000

e-00

51.

1000

e-00

40.

0000

3.93

022.

4300

e-00

31.

7000

e-00

42.

6000

e-00

36.

5000

e-00

41.

6000

e-00

48.

2000

e-00

40.

0000

3.92

803.

9280


A.1.1EmissionsInventoryA.1.1.3 HaulRoad

EMFAC2014Output

HaulTruck(AnnualEmissions)

Pal

lad

ium T

ow

ers ‐ C

on

stru

ctio

n H

eal

th R

isk

Ass

ess

me

nt

EMFA

C2

01

4 O

utp

ut

and A

nal

ysis

EMFA

C2

01

4 O

utp

ut

cale

nd

ar_y

ear

seas

on

_mo

nth

sub

_are

ave

hic

le_c

lass

fue

lm

od

el y

ear

pro

cess

po

lluta

nt

em

issi

on r

ate (

g/h

r)

20

16

An

nu

alLo

s A

nge

les

(SC

)T7

Sin

gle

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Dsl

Agg

rega

teID

LEX

PM

10

0.3

10

5

20

16

An

nu

alLo

s A

nge

les

(SC

)T7

Sin

gle

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Dsl

20

10

IDLE

XP

M1

00

.00

15

cale

nd

ar_y

ear

seas

on

_mo

nth

sub

_are

ave

hic

le_c

lass

fue

lm

od

el y

ear

pro

cess

po

lluta

nt

em

issi

on (

ton

/day

)

20

16

An

nu

alLo

s A

nge

les

(SC

)T7

Sin

gle

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Dsl

Agg

rega

teR

UN

EXP

M1

00

.02

70

20

16

An

nu

alLo

s A

nge

les

(SC

)T7

Sin

gle

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Dsl

20

10

RU

NEX

PM

10

0.0

00

17

3

cale

nd

ar_y

ear

seas

on

_mo

nth

sub

_are

ave

hic

le_c

lass

fue

lm

od

el y

ear

VM

T (m

i/d

ay)

po

pu

lati

on (

veh

)

20

16

An

nu

alLo

s A

nge

les

(SC

)T7

Sin

gle

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Dsl

Agg

rega

te2

06

87

0.1

32

26

39

.40

6

20

16

An

nu

alLo

s A

nge

les

(SC

)T7

Sin

gle

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Dsl

20

10

64

84

.23

16

7.6

77

Ru

nn

ing

Exh

aust E

mis

sio

n F

acto

r C

alcu

lati

on

veh

icle

_cla

ssm

od

el y

ear

em

issi

on (

ton

/day

)p

op

ula

tio

n (

veh

)V

MT

(mi/

day

)EF (

g/m

i)

T7 S

ingl

e C

on

stru

ctio

nA

ggre

gate

0.0

27

02

63

9.4

06

20

68

70

.13

20

.11

85

T7 S

ingl

e C

on

stru

ctio

n2

01

00

.00

01

73

67

.67

76

48

4.2

31

0.0

24

2

Pal

lad

ium T

ow

ers ‐ C

on

stru

ctio

n H

eal

th R

isk

Ass

ess

me

nt

Hau

l Tru

ck (

An

nu

al E

mis

sio

ns)

On‐R

oad

Hau

l Tru

ck Id

ling

Emis

sio

ns

IDSo

urc

eV

ech

icle C

ate

gory

Qu

eu

ing

Sto

ps

pe

r

Day

Idlin

g M

inu

tes

pe

r Q

ue

uin

g

Sto

p

Load

ings p

er

Day

Idlin

g M

inu

tes

pe

r Lo

adin

g

Un

load

ings p

er

Day

Idlin

g M

inu

tes

pe

r U

nlo

adin

g

PM

10

(g/h

r)

PM

10

(lb

s/d

ay)

Du

rati

on

(day

s)

PM

10

(lb

s/ye

ar)

Co

ncr

ete

Tru

cks

Hea

vy T

ruck

sT7

sin

gle

con

stru

ctio

n6

00

53

00

10

30

01

00

.31

05

0.1

02

72

0.1

02

7Ex

cava

tio

n T

ruck

sH

aul T

ruck

sT7

sin

gle

con

stru

ctio

n2

34

51

17

10

11

71

00

.00

15

0.0

00

21

08

0.0

10

4

On‐R

oad

Hau

l Tru

ck ‐ T

rave

l Em

issi

on

s (w

ith

in 1

/4 m

ile o

f si

te)

IDSo

urc

eV

ech

icle C

ate

gory

Re

gio

nC

ale

nd

ar Y

ear

Mo

de

l Ye

arR

un

nin

g Sp

ee

d

On

e‐W

ay T

rip

s

pe

r D

ay

Mile

s p

er

On

e‐

Way T

rip

PM

10

(g/m

i)

PM

10

(lb

s/d

ay)

Du

rati

on

(day

s)

PM

10

(lb

s/ye

ar)

Co

ncr

ete

Tru

cks

Hea

vy T

ruck

sT7

sin

gle

con

stru

ctio

nLo

s A

nge

les

(SC

)2

01

6A

ggre

gate

dA

ggre

gate

d6

00

0.2

50

.11

85

0.0

39

22

0.0

78

4

Exca

vati

on T

ruck

sH

aul T

ruck

sT7

sin

gle

con

stru

ctio

nLo

s A

nge

les

(SC

)2

01

62

01

0A

ggre

gate

d2

34

0.2

50

.02

42

0.0

03

11

08

0.3

37

0


A.1.1 EmissionsInventoryA.1.1.4 DieselParticulateEmissionsSummary

Palladium TowersConstruction HRA ‐ Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Emissions Summary

Summary of Construction DPM Sources

Construction of Towers 453.54 g/lb

Rehabilitation of Palladium 14 hrs/day

Continuous Concrete Pour

Excavation Truck Trips ‐ Idling

Excavation Truck Trips ‐ On‐Road

HARP Sources

Source DPM (lbs/year) DPM (lbs/day) DPM (g/day) DPM (g/hr) DPM (g/s)

Construction of Towers 21.41 0.0586 26.60 1.90 5.2777E‐04

Rehabilitation of Palladium 0.06 0.0002 0.07 0.01 1.4793E‐06

Off‐site Truck Emissions 0.18 0.0005 0.22 0.02 4.3432E‐06

Given Values


A.1.2AERMODSource‐ReceptorDiagram

(AERMODOutputavailableelectronically)

AERMOD View - Lakes Environmental Software

377500 377600 377700 377800 377900 378000 378100 378200 378300

UTM East [m]

3773

500

3773

600

3773

700

3773

800

3773

900

3774

000

3774

100

3774

200

3774

300

UT

M N

orth

[m

]

SCALE:

0 0.2 km

1:6,008

PROJECT TITLE:

Palladium Residences HRAConstruction Source-Receptor Diagram

COMMENTS:

Palladium Construction HRA

Max Impacted Receptor

COMPANY NAME:

PCR Environmental Services

MODELER:

DATE:

10/15/2015

PROJECT NO.:

SOURCES:

3

RECEPTORS:

450


A.1.3HARPOutputFiles

Pal

lad

ium T

ow

ers ‐ C

on

stru

ctio

n H

eal

th R

isk

Ass

ess

me

nt

HA

RP O

utp

ut ‐

3rd T

rim

est

er

Star

t A

ge

Top 1

0 M

ax Im

pac

ted R

ece

pto

rs

Re

cep

tor

No

.X

Y

Can

cer

Ris

k

(Ch

ance p

er

Mill

ion

)P

olI

DP

olA

BB

REV

Sce

nar

io

95

37

77

80

37

73

80

05

.19

E‐0

69

90

1D

iese

lExh

PM

3Yr

Can

cerH

igh

End

43

13

77

92

3.9

63

77

39

67

.18

6.4

6E‐

06

99

01

Die

selE

xhP

M3

YrC

ance

rHig

hEn

d

43

23

77

93

3.9

63

77

39

67

.18

5.4

8E‐

06

99

01

Die

selE

xhP

M3

YrC

ance

rHig

hEn

d

43

53

77

92

3.9

63

77

39

77

.18

6.3

8E‐

06

99

01

Die

selE

xhP

M3

YrC

ance

rHig

hEn

d

43

63

77

93

3.9

63

77

39

77

.18

5.4

4E‐

06

99

01

Die

selE

xhP

M3

YrC

ance

rHig

hEn

d

43

93

77

92

3.9

63

77

39

87

.18

6.1

7E‐

06

99

01

Die

selE

xhP

M3

YrC

ance

rHig

hEn

d

44

03

77

93

3.9

63

77

39

87

.18

5.3

0E‐

06

99

01

Die

selE

xhP

M3

YrC

ance

rHig

hEn

d

44

33

77

92

3.9

63

77

39

97

.18

5.8

4E‐

06

99

01

Die

selE

xhP

M3

YrC

ance

rHig

hEn

d

44

43

77

93

3.9

63

77

39

97

.18

5.0

7E‐

06

99

01

Die

selE

xhP

M3

YrC

ance

rHig

hEn

d

44

73

77

92

3.9

63

77

40

07

.18

5.4

2E‐

06

99

01

Die

selE

xhP

M3

YrC

ance

rHig

hEn

d

Re

cep

tor

Co

ord

inat

es

(UTM

)

AppendixA.2OperationsHRA







SourceParameters

DeliveryTruck

TransportationRefrigerationUnitEmissions

DieselEmergencyGeneratorEmissions


City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Hum

an Health

Risk Assessmen

t

Source Param

eters:

Med

ium‐Duty De

livery Trucks

Num

ber o

f Med

ium‐Duty Trucks (T

6)24

trucks/day

Estimated based on 3 trucks/hour, 2 loading bays, 8

hours/day

Trucks per Hou

r3

trucks/hou

rEstimated based on capacity of the Project site.

Idling Time

5

min/truck

Assumed

value.

Heavy‐Du

ty Delivery Trucks

Num

ber o

f Heavy‐Duty Trucks (T

7)24

trucks/day


hours/day

Trucks per Hou

r3

trucks/hou


Idling Time

5

min/truck

Transportatio

n Re

firgerator U

nits (T

RUs)

Num

ber o

f TRU

s5

TRUs/day

Assumed

value (20% of heavy‐duty trucks equipped

with TRU).

TRUs p

er Hou

r2

TRU/hou

rAssumed

value.

Idling Time

60

min/TRU

Assumed

value (1 hour per TRU).

Emergency Gen

erators

Num

ber o

f Gen

erators

2

gene

rators

Based on Project inform

ation received.

Ratin

g2,00

0

kWBased on Project inform

ation received.

2,68

2

hpBased on Project inform

ation received.

Mainten

ance/testin

g ho

urs

2

hours/gene

rator/day

Assumed

value.

100

hours/gene

rator/year

Upper limit based on CARB Air Toxics Control M

easure (requires compliance with 0.01 grams/bhp‐hr lim

it for DPM).

Charbroiling

Poun

ds of C

harbroiled Ch

icken

116.5

po

unds/day

Based on SCAQMD Staff Report (1997) that found an average of 233 pounds of meat charbroiled per large restaurant

Poun

ds of C

harbroiled Be

ef11

6.5

po

unds/day

(large chain‐driven charbroiler operations), and assumes 50% chicken and 50% beef.

Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 201

4.

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Hum

an Health

Risk Assessmen

t

Delivery Truck Em

ission

s:

Diesel Truck Emission

Factors fo

r Run

ning

Exhau

st and

Idlin

gIdling Em

ission Factor

Calend

arEM

FAC2

011

(grams/veh‐hr)

Truck Type

Year

Veh. Class

TOG

PM10

Med

ium‐Duty Truck

2018

T6 instate sm

all

2.16

08

0.20

51

Med

ium‐Duty Truck

2020

T6 instate sm

all

2.19

32

0.13

31

Med

ium‐Duty Truck

2025

T6 instate sm

all

2.41

09

0.09

21

Med

ium‐Duty Truck

2030

T6 instate sm

all

2.43

00

0.09

10

Med

ium‐Duty Truck

2035

T6 instate sm

all

2.44

02

0.09

05

70‐Year W

eighted Av

erage*

T6 instate sm

all

2.41

18

0.09

70

Heavy‐Du

ty Truck

2018

T7 tractor

7.25

42

0.12

27

Heavy‐Du

ty Truck

2020

T7 tractor

7.66

79

0.11

68

Heavy‐Du

ty Truck

2025

T7 tractor

8.32

46

0.10

96

Heavy‐Du

ty Truck

2030

T7 tractor

8.36

13

0.10

86

Heavy‐Du

ty Truck

2035

T7 tractor

8.38

65

0.10

81

70‐Year W

eighted Av

erage*

T7 tractor

8.29

66

0.10

93

Notes:

* The 70

‐year w

eighted average is calculated

by assuming the calend

ar year 2

018 em

ission factors (EFs) re

presen

t years 201

8‐20

19, 202

0 EFs rep

resent years 202

0‐20

24, 202

5 EFs rep

resent years 202

5‐20

29, 203

0 EFs rep

resent years 203

0‐20

34, and

203

5 EFs rep

resent years 203

5‐20

87.

Source: C

alifo

rnia Air Re

sources B

oard, EMFA

C201

1. M

odel param

eters: Sou

th Coast Air Quality Managem

ent D

istrict, aggregated

mod

el years and

speeds, ann

ual

average em

ission factors.


s from Id

ling

Idling Time

Idling Em

issions

Calend

arNum

ber o

fpe

r Truck

(pou

nds/ho

ur)

Truck Type

Year

Hours1

Trucks

(minutes)

TOG

PM10

Med

ium‐Duty Truck

Peak Hou

r20

181

35.00

1.19

E‐03

1.13

E‐04

Day (M

ax)

2018

824

5.00

1.19

E‐03

1.13

E‐04

Day (70‐Year W

t Avg)

–8

245.00

1.33

E‐03

5.34

E‐05

Heavy‐Du

ty Truck

Peak Hou

r20

181

35.00

4.00

E‐03

6.76

E‐05

Day (M

ax)

2018

824

5.00

4.00

E‐03

6.76

E‐05

Day (70‐Year W

t Avg)

–8

245.00

4.57

E‐03

6.02

E‐05

Note:

1.Assumes daily emissions occur during the daytim

e over an 8 ho

ur period (i.e., no nighttim

e de

liveries).

Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 201

4.

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Hum

an Health

Risk Assessmen

t

Tran

sportatio

n Re

frigeration Unit E

mission

s:

Tran

sportatio

n Re

frigeration Unit (TR

U) E

mission

Factors

Calend

arTo

tal

Total PM

Emission Factor (lbs/hr) 1

Equipm

ent T

ype

Year

Fleet H

ours

(tpy)

PM10

THC

2TO

G 3

TRU

2018

275,12

0,51

6

0.27

42

1.99

E‐06

0.00

34

0.00

37

2020

288,19

0,77

0

0.09

17

6.36

E‐07

0.00

34

0.00

37

2025

326,73

0,41

6

0.10

30

6.31

E‐07

0.00

34

0.00

37

70‐Year W

eighted Av

erage*

––

6.70

E‐07

0.00

34

0.00

37

Notes:

Sources:

1.California Air R

esou

rces Board, 201

1 Transportatio

n Re


U) R

egulation, 201

1 Em

issions Inventory Da

tabase (w

ith ado

pted

201

1 am

endm

ents).

2.National Ren

ewable Ene

rgy Labo

ratory, Emissions of T

ranspo

rt Refrig

eration Units with

CAR

B Diesel, G

as‐to‐Liqu

id Diesel, and Em

issions Con

trol Devices, M

ay 201

0.

Total hydrocarbon

(THC

) emission factor of 1

.56 gram

s/ho

ur con

verted

to pou

nds p

er hou

r (CA

RB diesel, high

engine speed, diesel particulate filter).

3.U.S. Enviro

nmen

tal Protection Ag

ency, Con

version Factors for Hydrocarbon

Emission Co

mpo

nents, Ju

ly 201

0.

TOG to

THC

con

version factor of 1

.070

for d

iesel engines.

Tran

sportatio

n Re


U) E

mission

sIdling Time

Idling Em

issions

Calend

arNum

ber

per T

RU(pou

nds/ho

ur)

Equipm

ent T

ype

Year

Hours1

of TRU

s(m

inutes)

TOG

PM10

TRU (o

n‐site idling)

Peak Hou

r20

181

260

7.36

E‐03

3.99

E‐06

Day (M

ax)

2018

85

602.30

E‐03

1.25

E‐06

Day (70‐Year W

t Avg)

–8

560

2.30

E‐03

4.19

E‐07

Note:


e over an 8 ho


e de

liveries).

Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 201

4.

* The 70

‐year w

eighted average is calculated

by assuming the calend

ar year 2

018 em

ission factors (EFs) re

presen

t years 201

8‐20

19, 202

0 EFs rep

resent years 202

0‐20

24, and

202

5 EFs rep

resent years 202

5‐20

87.

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Hum

an Health

Risk Assessmen

t

Diesel Emergency Gen

erator Emission

sMainten

ance/Testin

g Em

issions

(pou

nds/ho

ur)

Equipm

ent T

ype

Hours1

VOC

TOG2

PM10

Emergency Gen

erators

Peak Hou

r1

2.84

E+00

2.88

E+00

1.18

E‐01

Day (M

ax)

87.10

E‐01

7.21

E‐01

2.96

E‐02

Annu

al (averaged over 8 hou

rs/day)

100

1.08

E‐02

1.10

E‐02

4.50

E‐04

Note:

1.Assumes m

ainten

ance and

testing wou

ld occur during the daytim

e ho

urs (i.e., no

nighttim

e mainten

ance and

testing).

2.U.S. Enviro

nmen

tal Protection Ag

ency, Con

version Factors for Hydrocarbon

Emission Co

mpo

nents, Ju

ly 201

0.

TOG to

THC

con

version factor of 1

.070

for d

iesel engines; V

OC to THC

con

version factor of 1

.053

for d

iesel engines;

therefore, TOG to

VOC conversio

n factor is 1.070

/1.053

= 1.016

.

Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 201

4.

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Hum

an Health

Risk Assessmen

t

Charbroilin

g Em

ission

sPo

unds M

eat

Ope

ratin

gPe

ak Hou

rDa

ilyho

urs/day

Poun

ds Chicken

29.13

116.50

12

Poun

ds Beef

29.13

116.50

12

Emission Factor

Peak Hou

r Emissions

Daily Hou

r Emissions

Compo

und

(pou

nds/ton meat)

(pou

nds/ho

ur)

(pou

nds/ho

ur)

Chicken

Beef

Chicken

Beef

Total

Chicken

Beef

Total

Acen

aphthe

ne3.40

E‐05

5.10

E‐05

4.95

E‐07

7.43

E‐07

1.24

E‐06

1.65

E‐07

2.48

E‐07

4.13

E‐07

PM83

%Acen

aphthylene

7.00

E‐04

1.44

E‐03

1.02

E‐05

2.10

E‐05

3.12

E‐05

3.40

E‐06

7.00

E‐06

1.04

E‐05

PM83

%An

thracene

2.99

E‐04

3.20

E‐04

4.36

E‐06

4.65

E‐06

9.01

E‐06

1.45

E‐06

1.55

E‐06

3.00

E‐06

PM83

%Be

nz(a)anthracen

e1.16

E‐04

7.48

E‐05

1.68

E‐06

1.09

E‐06

2.77

E‐06

5.61

E‐07

3.63

E‐07

9.24

E‐07

PM83

%Be

nzo(a)pyrene

3.40

E‐05

5.10

E‐05

4.95

E‐07

7.43

E‐07

1.24

E‐06

1.65

E‐07

2.48

E‐07

4.13

E‐07

PM83

%Be

nzo(g,h,i)p

erylen

e3.06

E‐05

5.78

E‐05

4.46

E‐07

8.42

E‐07

1.29

E‐06

1.49

E‐07

2.81

E‐07

4.29

E‐07

PM83

%Biph

enyl

3.09

E‐04

5.85

E‐04

4.51

E‐06

8.52

E‐06

1.30

E‐05

1.50

E‐06

2.84

E‐06

4.34

E‐06

PM83

%Fluo

rene

2.45

E‐04

4.28

E‐04

3.56

E‐06

6.24

E‐06

9.80

E‐06

1.19

E‐06

2.08

E‐06

3.27

E‐06

PM83

%Fluo

ranthe

ne4.35

E‐04

4.76

E‐04

6.34

E‐06

6.93

E‐06

1.33

E‐05

2.11

E‐06

2.31

E‐06

4.42

E‐06

PM83

%Inde

no(1,2,3‐c,d)pyren

e2.04

E‐05

3.06

E‐05

2.97

E‐07

4.46

E‐07

7.43

E‐07

9.90

E‐08

1.49

E‐07

2.48

E‐07

PM83

%Naphthalene

2.45

E‐03

5.32

E‐03

3.57

E‐05

7.75

E‐05

1.13

E‐04

1.19

E‐05

2.58

E‐05

3.77

E‐05

VOC

86%

Phen

anthrene

1.18

E‐03

1.66

E‐03

1.71

E‐05

2.42

E‐05

4.13

E‐05

5.71

E‐06

8.05

E‐06

1.38

E‐05

PM83

%Pyrene

6.12

E‐04

6.46

E‐04

8.91

E‐06

9.41

E‐06

1.83

E‐05

2.97

E‐06

3.14

E‐06

6.11

E‐06

PM83

%

Source: U

.S. Enviro

nmen

tal Protection Ag

ency, M

etho

ds fo

r Develop

ing a National Emission Inventory for C

ommercial Coo

king

Processes: Techn

ical M

emorandu

m, (20

03).

Control

Efficiency




SourceProperties

BuildingHeights

City of Los AngelesPALLADIUM RESIDENCES

Human Health Risk Assessment

AERMOD Source Properties

Release Exhaust Exhaust AreaAERMOD Source Height Temp Flow DescriptionSource ID Type (m) (°F) (acfm) (meters2)

CHAR1 Area 3 – – Charbroiling emissions, southwest corner 625 CHAR2 Area 3 – – Charbroiling emissions, northeast side 975 STCK1 a Point 106.7 987 19,209 Generator emissions, West Tower –STCK2 a Point 106.7 987 19,209 Generator emissions, East Tower –HHDT1 Area 3 – – Heavy‐duty truck emissions, southwest corner 150 HHDT2 Area 3 – – Heavy‐duty truck emissions, central area 300 MHDT Area 3 – – Medium‐duty truck emissions, central area 300 TRU1 Area 3 – – TRU emissions, southwest corner 150 TRU2 Area 3 – – TRU emissions, central area 300

Notes:a.

Source: PCR Services Corporation, 2014

Conversion from Unit Emissions Factor to Source‐Specific Emissions Factor (Post Dispersion Modeling)Unit Source‐Specific Emissions Factor

Source ID/ Emissions Cancer Chronic Acute AcuteCompound Factor Risk 1‐Hour 8‐Hour

(g/s‐m2) (g/s‐m2) (g/s‐m2) (g/s‐m2) (g/s‐m2)

CHAR1 1.00 Acenaphthene 4.16E‐11 4.16E‐11 1.25E‐10 4.16E‐11Acenaphthylene 1.05E‐09 1.05E‐09 3.14E‐09 1.05E‐09Anthracene 3.03E‐10 3.03E‐10 9.08E‐10 3.03E‐10Benz(a)anthracene 9.32E‐11 9.32E‐11 2.79E‐10 9.32E‐11Benzo(a)pyrene 4.16E‐11 4.16E‐11 1.25E‐10 4.16E‐11Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 4.33E‐11 4.33E‐11 1.30E‐10 4.33E‐11Biphenyl 4.38E‐10 4.38E‐10 1.31E‐09 4.38E‐10Fluorene 3.29E‐10 3.29E‐10 9.88E‐10 3.29E‐10Fluoranthene 4.46E‐10 4.46E‐10 1.34E‐09 4.46E‐10Indeno(1,2,3‐c,d)pyrene 2.50E‐11 2.50E‐11 7.49E‐11 2.50E‐11Naphthalene 3.80E‐09 3.80E‐09 1.14E‐08 3.80E‐09Phenanthrene 1.39E‐09 1.39E‐09 4.16E‐09 1.39E‐09Pyrene 6.16E‐10 6.16E‐10 1.85E‐09 6.16E‐10

Generator exhaust temperature and flow based on technical specifications for a representative 2,000 kW generator (http://www.generac.com/all‐products/generators/business‐standby‐generators/diesel‐generators/2000kw).

Unit Source‐Specific Emissions FactorSource ID/ Emissions Cancer Chronic Acute AcuteCompound Factor Risk 1‐Hour 8‐Hour

(g/s‐m2) (g/s‐m2) (g/s‐m2) (g/s‐m2) (g/s‐m2)

CHAR2 1.00 Acenaphthene 2.67E‐11 2.67E‐11 8.00E‐11 2.67E‐11Acenaphthylene 6.72E‐10 6.72E‐10 2.02E‐09 6.72E‐10Anthracene 1.94E‐10 1.94E‐10 5.82E‐10 1.94E‐10Benz(a)anthracene 5.97E‐11 5.97E‐11 1.79E‐10 5.97E‐11Benzo(a)pyrene 2.67E‐11 2.67E‐11 8.00E‐11 2.67E‐11Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2.77E‐11 2.77E‐11 8.32E‐11 2.77E‐11Biphenyl 2.80E‐10 2.80E‐10 8.41E‐10 2.80E‐10Fluorene 2.11E‐10 2.11E‐10 6.33E‐10 2.11E‐10Fluoranthene 2.86E‐10 2.86E‐10 8.57E‐10 2.86E‐10Indeno(1,2,3‐c,d)pyrene 1.60E‐11 1.60E‐11 4.80E‐11 1.60E‐11Naphthalene 2.44E‐09 2.44E‐09 7.31E‐09 2.44E‐09Phenanthrene 8.89E‐10 8.89E‐10 2.67E‐09 8.89E‐10Pyrene 3.95E‐10 3.95E‐10 1.18E‐09 3.95E‐10

STCK1 1.00 DPM (in units of g/s) 2.83E‐05 2.83E‐05 7.45E‐03 1.86E‐03TOG (in units of g/s) 6.91E‐04 6.91E‐04 1.82E‐01 4.54E‐02

STCK2 1.00 DPM (in units of g/s) 2.83E‐05 2.83E‐05 7.45E‐03 1.86E‐03TOG (in units of g/s) 6.91E‐04 6.91E‐04 1.82E‐01 4.54E‐02

HHDT1 1.00 DPM 2.53E‐08 2.84E‐08 2.84E‐08 2.84E‐08TOG 1.92E‐06 1.68E‐06 1.68E‐06 1.68E‐06

HHDT2 1.00 DPM 1.26E‐08 1.42E‐08 1.42E‐08 1.42E‐08TOG 9.60E‐07 8.40E‐07 8.40E‐07 8.40E‐07

MHDT 1.00 DPM 2.24E‐08 4.75E‐08 4.75E‐08 4.75E‐08TOG 5.58E‐07 5.00E‐07 5.00E‐07 5.00E‐07

TRU1 1.00 DPM 1.76E‐10 5.23E‐10 1.67E‐09 5.23E‐10TOG 9.66E‐07 9.66E‐07 3.09E‐06 9.66E‐07

TRU2 1.00 DPM 8.79E‐11 2.62E‐10 8.37E‐10 2.62E‐10TOG 4.83E‐07 4.83E‐07 1.55E‐06 4.83E‐07


City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Hum

an Health

Risk Assessmen

t

AERM

OD Building Heights

AERM

OD

Height

Height Data Source

Bldg

ID(ft)

Descrip

tion

P_BLD_

135

0

Prop

osed

Project Descriptio

nProject R

esiden

tial Tow

er 1

P_BLD_

235

0

Prop

osed

Project Descriptio

nProject R

esiden

tial Tow

er 2

BLD_

3 Tier 1

50

Online search on Em

poris.com

for "Sunset M

edia Cen

ter" (visu

al est.)

Sunset M

edia Tow

er

Tier 2

294

Online search on Em

poris.com

for "Sunset M

edia Cen

ter"

Sunset M

edia Tow

er

BLD_

4 Tier 1

80

Online search on Em

poris.com

for "Ho

llywoo

d Vine

Con

dominiums" (visu

al est.)

1600

Vine (Building A)

Tier 2

174

Online search on Em

poris.com

for "Ho

llywoo

d Vine

Con

dominiums"

1600

Vine (Building A)

BLD_

517

4

Online search on Em

poris.com

for "Ho

llywoo

d Vine

Con

dominiums"

1600

Vine (Building B)

BLD_

617

0

Online search on Em

poris.com

for "W Hollywoo

d"W Hotel (B

uilding A)

BLD_

717

0

Online search on Em

poris.com

for "W Hollywoo

d"W Hotel (B

uilding B)

BLD_

813

0

Online search on Em

poris.com

for "Ho

llywoo

d Vine

Con

dominiums" (visu

al est.)

1600

Vine (Building C)

BLD_

929

7

Online search on Em

poris.com

for "Sunset Vine To

wer"

Sunset Vine To

wer

BLD_

1091

Coun

cil on Tall Bu

ildings and

Urban

Habita

t (CT

BUH), Tall Building He

ight Calculator (5 story, m

ixed

‐use building)

Sunset Vine Re

siden

tial

BLD_

11 Tier 1

18

Columbia Square DEIR, Figure II‐5, http://cityplanning.lacity.org/eir/Co

lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in

dex.html (visual est).

Radio Bu

ilding

Tier 2

22


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in

dex.html.

Radio Bu

ilding

Tier 3

78


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in

dex.html.

Radio Bu

ilding

BLD_

12 Tier 1

18


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in


Televisio

n Bu

ilding

Tier 2

22


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in

dex.html.

Televisio

n Bu

ilding

BLD_

13 Tier 1

18


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in


Stud

io A Building

Tier 2

43


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in

dex.html.

Stud

io A Building

BLD_

14 Tier 1

24


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in

dex.html.

Columbia Square Retail, Ho

tel, Re

siden

tial Building

Tier 2

75.33


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in

dex.html.


tel, Re

siden

tial Building

Tier 3

447.33


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in

dex.html.


tel, Re

siden

tial Building

BLD_

1586

.33


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in

dex.html.

Columbia Square Residen

tial (Bu

ilding A)

BLD_

1686

.33


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in

dex.html.

Columbia Square Residen

tial (Bu

ilding B)

BLD_

1720

4.00


lumbiaSqu

are/DE

IR/in

dex.html.

Columbia Square Office Building

BLD_

1875

BLVD

620

0 Project, DE

IR, Figure IV.B‐11, http://www.plann

ing.lacity.org/EIR/Blvd6

200/DE

IR/BLVD6

200D

EIR.htm.

BLVD

620

0 (Building A)

BLD_

1975

BLVD

620

0 Project, DE

IR, Figure IV.B‐11, http://www.plann

ing.lacity.org/EIR/Blvd6

200/DE

IR/BLVD6

200D

EIR.htm.

BLVD

620

0 (Building B)

BLD_

2011

5

CTBU

H, Tall Building He

ight Calculator (7 story, m

ixed

‐use building)

Selm

a and Vine

BLD_

2191

CTBU

H, Tall Building He

ight Calculator (assumed

5 story, m

ixed

‐use building)

6250

Sun

set

Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 201

4.

AERMOD View - Lakes Environmental Software

PLBN1

TRU2

TRU1

MHDTHHDT2

HHDT1

CHAR2

CHAR1

STCK2

STCK1

BLD_18, Tier 1

BLD_14, Tier 2BLD_14, Tier 1


BLD_12, Tier 2

BLD_10, Tier 1

BLD_8, Tier 1

BLD_7, Tier 1

BLD_6, Tier 1

BLD_5, Tier 1BLD_4, Tier 2BLD_4, Tier 1

P_BLD_2, Tier 1

P_BLD_1, Tier 1

BLD_21, Tier 1

BLD_20, Tier 1

BLD_19, Tier 1

BLD_17, Tier 1

BLD_16, Tier 1

BLD_15, Tier 1

BLD_14, Tier 3


BLD_11, Tier 2

BLD_11, Tier 1

BLD_9, Tier 1


377500 377600 377700 377800 377900 378000 378100 378200

UTM East [m]

3773

600

3773

700

3773

800

3773

900

3774

000

3774

100

3774

200

3774

300

UT

M N

orth

[m

]

SCALE:

0 0.1 km

1:5,000

PROJECT TITLE:

Palladium Residences HRAOperations Source-Receptor Diagram

COMMENTS: COMPANY NAME:

PCR Environmental Services

MODELER:

DATE:

10/15/2015

PROJECT NO.:

SOURCES:

9

RECEPTORS:

456



DieselTruckExhaustEmissions

StationaryDieselEngineExhaustEmissions


City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Hum

an Health

Risk Assessmen

t

Diesel Truck Exhau

st Emission

s ‐ Health

Risk Factors a

nd Acute Spe

ciation

Pollutant

CAS Num

ber

Inhalatio

n CP

F1Ch

ronic Inhalatio

n1Acute Inhalatio

n (1‐Hou

r)1

Acute Inhalatio

n (8‐Hou

r)1

Weight

(mg/kg‐day)‐1

REL (µg/m

3 )Target Organ*

REL (µ

g/m

3 )Target Organ*

REL (µ

g/m

3 )Target Organ*

Fractio

n2

DPM

9901

1.1

5

RESP

——

——

—

Organics

TOG Fraction

Acetalde

hyde

7507

047

0

EYE, RESP

300

RESP

0.07

350

Benzen

e71

432

1,30

0

DEV, HEM

, IMMUN, R

EPRO

——

0.02

000

1,3‐Bu

tadien

e10

6990

660

DEV, REPRO

9

DEV, REPRO

0.00

190

Form

alde

hyde

5000

055

EYE

9

RESP

0.14

710

Methano

l67

561

28,000

NS

——

0.00

030

MEK

7893

313

,000

EYE, RESP

——

0.01

480

Styren

e10

0425

21,000

DEV, EYE, R

EPRO

, RESP

——

0.00

060

Toluen

e10

8883

37,000

DEV, EYE, N

S, REPRO

, RESP

——

0.01

470

Xylene

s13

3020

722

,000

EYE, NS, RESP

——

0.01

050

Particulates

PM10 Fraction

Arsenic

7440

382

0.2

CVS, DEV

, NS, REPRO

0.01

5

CVS, DEV

, NS, REPRO

, RESP, SK

0.00

0005

Chlorin

e77

8250

521

0

EYE, RESP

——

0.00

0344

Copp

er74

4050

810

0

RESP

——

0.00

0025

Mangane

se74

3996

5—

—0.17

NS

0.00

0040

Mercury

7439

976

0.6

DEV, NS, REPRO

0.06

DEV, KIDN, N

S, REPRO

0.00

0030

Nickel

7440

020

0.2

IMMUN

0.06

IMMUN, R

ESP

0.00

0019

Sulfates

9960

120

RESP

——

0.01

7429

Vanadium

7440

622

30

EYE, RESP

——

0.00

0029

1. 2. * Ke

y to Toxicological End

points

ALIM

Alim

entary Tract

IMMUN

Immun

e System

BNBo

neKIDN

Kidn

ey

CVS

Cardiovascular System

NS

Nervous System

DEV

Developm

ental System

REPR

ORe

prod

uctiv

e System

ENDC

Endo

crine System

RESP

Respira

tory System

EYE

Eye

SKSkin

HEM

Hematologic System

Sources:

California Air R

esou

rces Board, "Co

nsolidated

Table of O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved Risk Assessm

ent H

ealth

Value

s," "O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved Ch

ronic Re

ference Expo

sure Levels a

nd Target O

rgans," "O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved Acute Re

ference Expo

sure Levels

and Target Organs," and "O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved 8‐Ho

ur Referen

ce Exposure Levels and Target Organs," http://w

ww.arb.ca.gov/toxics/health

val/h

ealth

val.htm

. Tables last u

pdated

: January 30, 201

4. Dow

nloade

d 05

/08/20

14.

California Air R

esou

rces Board, "Organic Gas Spe

ciation Profile Referen

ce Inform

ation," (09/20

/12, Profile 81

8), and

"CE

IDAR

S Particulate Matter (PM

) Spe

ciation Profiles," (09/20

/12, Profile 42

5), http://arb.ca.gov/ei/spe

ciate/dn

ldop

tvv100

01.php

. Do

wnloade

d 05

/08/20

14.

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Hum

an Health

Risk Assessmen

t

Stationa

ry Diesel Engine Exha

ust E

mission

s ‐ Health

Risk Factors a

nd Acute Spe

ciation

Pollutant

CAS Num

ber

Inhalatio

n CP

F1Ch

ronic Inhalatio

n1Acute Inhalatio

n (1‐Hou

r)1

Acute Inhalatio

n (8‐Hou

r)1

Weight

(mg/kg‐day)‐1

REL (µg/m

3 )Target Organ*

REL (µ

g/m

3 )Target Organ*

REL (µ

g/m

3 )Target Organ*

Fractio

n2

DPM

9901

1.1

5

RESP

——

——

—

Organics

TOG Fraction

Acetalde

hyde

7507

047

0

EYE, RESP

300

RESP

0.07

350

Benzen

e71

432

1,30

0

DEV, HEM

, IMMUN, R

EPRO

——

0.07

900

1,3‐Bu

tadien

e10

6990

660

DEV, REPRO

9

DEV, REPRO

0.07

000

Form

alde

hyde

5000

055

EYE

9

RESP

0.14

710

Methano

l67

561

28,000

NS

——

0.00

030

MEK

7893

313

,000

EYE, RESP

——

0.01

480

Styren

e10

0425

21,000

DEV, EYE, R

EPRO

, RESP

——

0.00

060

Toluen

e10

8883

37,000

DEV, EYE, N

S, REPRO

, RESP

——

0.01

470

Xylene

s13

3020

722

,000

EYE, NS, RESP

——

0.01

050

Particulates

PM10 Fraction

Arsenic

7440

382

0.2

CVS, DEV

, NS, REPRO

0.01

5

CVS, DEV

, NS, REPRO

, RESP, SK

0.00

5418

Nickel

7440

020

0.2

IMMUN

0.06

IMMUN, R

ESP

0.00

0500

Sulfates

9960

120

RESP

——

0.25

0000

Vanadium

7440

622

30

EYE, RESP

——

0.00

5500

1. 2. * Ke


points

ALIM

Alim

entary Tract

IMMUN

Immun

e System

BNBo

neKIDN

Kidn

ey

CVS


NS

Nervous System

DEV

Developm

ental System

REPR

ORe

prod

uctiv

e System

ENDC

Endo

crine System

RESP

Respira

tory System

EYE

Eye

SKSkin

HEM

Hematologic System

Sources:

California Air R

esou

rces Board, "Co

nsolidated

Table of O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved Risk Assessm

ent H

ealth

Value

s," "O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved Ch

ronic Re

ference Expo

sure Levels a

nd Target O

rgans," "O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved Acute Re

ference Expo

sure Levels

and Target Organs," and "O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved 8‐Ho

ur Referen



val/h

ealth

val.htm

. Tables last u

pdated

: January 30, 201

4. Dow

nloade

d 05

/08/20

14.

California Air R

esou

rces Board, "Organic Gas Spe

ciation Profile Referen

ce Inform

ation," (09/20

/12, Profiles 9 and

818

), and "CEIDA

RS Particulate Matter (PM

) Spe

ciation Profiles," (09/20

/12, Profiles 114

and

116

), http://arb.ca.gov/ei/spe

ciate/dn

ldop

tvv100

01.php

. Dow

nloade

d 05

/08/20

14.

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Hum

an Health

Risk Assessmen

t

Charbroilin

g Em

ission

s ‐ Health

Risk Factors an

d Ac

ute Speciatio

nPo

llutant

CAS Num

ber

Inhalatio

n CP

F1Ch

ronic Inhalatio

n1Acute Inhalatio

n (1‐Hou

r)1

Acute Inhalatio

n (8‐Hou

r)1

(mg/kg‐day)‐1

REL (µg/m

3 )Target Organ*

REL (µ

g/m

3 )Target Organ*

REL (µ

g/m

3 )Target Organ*

Acen

aphthe

ne3

8332

93.9

——

——

——

Acen

aphthylene

320

8968

3.9

——

——

——

Anthracene

312

0127

3.9

——

——

——

Benz(a)anthracen

e56

553

0.39

——

——

——

Benzo(a)pyrene

5032

83.9

——

——

——

Benzo(g,h,i)p

erylen

e319

1242

3.9

——

——

——

Biph

enyl

392

524

3.9

——

——

——

Fluo

rene

386

737

3.9

——

——

——

Fluo

ranthe

ne3

2064

403.9

——

——

——

Inde

no(1,2,3‐c,d)pyren

e19

3395

0.39

——

——

——

Naphthalene

9120

30.12

9

RESP

——

——

Phen

anthrene

385

018

3.9

——

——

——

Pyrene

312

9000

3.9

——

——

——

1. * Ke


points

ALIM

Alim

entary Tract

IMMUN

Immun

e System

BNBo

neKIDN

Kidn

ey

CVS


NS

Nervous System

DEV

Developm

ental System

REPR

ORe

prod

uctiv

e System

ENDC

Endo

crine System

RESP

Respira

tory System

EYE

Eye

SKSkin

HEM

Hematologic System

Sources:

California Air R

esou

rces Board, "Co

nsolidated

Table of O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved Risk Assessm

ent H

ealth

Value

s," "O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved Ch

ronic Re

ference Expo

sure Levels a

nd Target O

rgans," "O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved Acute Re

ference Expo

sure

Levels and Target Organs," and "O

EHHA

/ARB

App

roved 8‐Ho

ur Referen



val/h

ealth

val.htm

. Tables last u

pdated

: January 30, 201

4. Dow

nloade

d 05

/08/20

14.




MICRforages0to2

MICRforages2to16

MICRforages16to30

MICRforages31to70



Maximum Individual Cancer Risk (MICR) for ages 0 to 2Receptor/Source ID Pollutant CPF a Unit CONC SPFrac CONCSPF DBR b A EF ED AT FAH ASF Dose MICR Threshold Over?

MEI Residential

CHAR1 Acenaphthene 3.9 1.10E+04 4.16E‐11 4.57E‐07 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NOAcenaphthylene 3.9 1.10E+04 1.05E‐09 1.15E‐05 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.01 10 NO

Anthracene 3.9 1.10E+04 3.03E‐10 3.33E‐06 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NOBenz(a)anthracene 0.39 1.10E+04 9.32E‐11 1.02E‐06 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Benzo(a)pyrene 3.9 1.10E+04 4.16E‐11 4.57E‐07 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NOBenzo(g,h,i)perylene 3.9 1.10E+04 4.33E‐11 4.75E‐07 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Biphenyl 3.9 1.10E+04 4.38E‐10 4.81E‐06 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NOFluorene 3.9 1.10E+04 3.29E‐10 3.62E‐06 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Fluoranthene 3.9 1.10E+04 4.46E‐10 4.90E‐06 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NOIndeno(1,2,3‐c,d)pyrene 0.39 1.10E+04 2.50E‐11 2.74E‐07 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Naphthalene 0.12 1.10E+04 3.80E‐09 4.18E‐05 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NOPhenanthrene 3.9 1.10E+04 1.39E‐09 1.52E‐05 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.02 10 NO

Pyrene 3.9 1.10E+04 6.16E‐10 6.76E‐06 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.01 10 NOSubtotal 0.05 10 NO








STCK1 DPM 1.1 2.90E+00 2.83E‐05 8.21E‐05 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.02 10 NOSTCK2 DPM 1.1 2.25E+00 2.83E‐05 6.37E‐05 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.02 10 NOHHDT1 DPM 1.1 1.08E+03 2.53E‐08 2.72E‐05 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.01 10 NOHHDT2 DPM 1.1 7.47E+03 1.26E‐08 9.44E‐05 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.03 10 NOMHDT DPM 1.1 7.47E+03 2.24E‐08 1.68E‐04 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.01 0.05 10 NOTRU1 DPM 1.1 1.08E+03 1.76E‐10 1.89E‐07 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NOTRU2 DPM 1.1 7.47E+03 8.79E‐11 6.57E‐07 1090 1 350 2 25550 0.85 10 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Total 0.69 10 NO

Sources:a. California Air Resources Board, "Consolidated Table of OEHHA/ARB Approved Risk Assessment Health Values," http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/healthval/healthval.htm.

Tables last updated: January 30, 2014. Downloaded 05/08/2014.b. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, The Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, (2003).

Exposure factors used to calculate cancer risk:CPF Cancer Potency Factor (mg/kg‐day)‐1.CONC Unit Concentration (µg/m3) from AERMOD.SPFrac Fraction of speciated componentCONCSPF Pollutant Concentration (µg/m3) multiplied by the speciated component fractionDBR Daily breathing rate (L/kg (body weight) per day).A Inhalation absorption factor (default = 1).EF Exposure frequency (days/year).ED Exposure duration (years).AT Average time period over which exposure is averaged in days (days).Dose Dose = DBR × A × EF × ED / AT.



Maximum Individual Cancer Risk (MICR) for ages 2 to 16Receptor/Source ID Pollutant CPF a Unit CONC SPFrac CONCSPF DBR b A EF ED AT FAH ASF Dose MICR Threshold Over?

MEI Residential
















Total 0.84 10 NO






Maximum Individual Cancer Risk (MICR) for ages 16 through 30Receptor/Source ID Pollutant CPF a Unit CONC SPFrac CONCSPF DBR b A EF ED AT FAH ASF Dose MICR Threshold Over?

MEI Residential
















Total 0.13 10 NO






Maximum Individual Cancer Risk (MICR) for ages 31 through 70Receptor/Source ID Pollutant CPF a Unit CONC SPFrac CONCSPF DBR b A EF ED AT FAH ASF Dose MICR Threshold Over?

MEI Residential
















Total 0.32 10 NO




City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Hum

an Health

Risk Assessmen

t

Maxim

um In

dividu

al Can

cer R

isk (M

ICR)

Age

CHAR

1CH

AR2

All Sou

rces (C

HAR

1, CHAR

2, STC

K1, STC

K2, H

HDT1, H

HDT2, M

HDT, TRU

1, TRU

2)3rd Trim

ester

0.00

0.03

0.03

0 < 2

0.05

0.52

0.69

2<16

0.06

0.63

0.84

16‐30

0.01

0.10

0.13

31‐70

0.02

0.24

0.32

Lifetim

e0.15

1.50

2.01

Threshold

1010

10Exceed

?FA

LSE

FALSE

FALSE

MICR by

Sou

rce



Maximum Individual Cancer Risk (MICR) ‐ Old OEHHA Methodology, With Controlled Charbroiler EmissionsReceptor/Source ID Pollutant CPF a Unit CONC SPFrac CONCSPF DBR b A EF ED AT Dose MICR Threshold Over?

MEI Residential

CHAR1 Acenaphthene 3.9 1.10E+04 4.16E‐11 4.57E‐07 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NOAcenaphthylene 3.9 1.10E+04 1.05E‐09 1.15E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.01 10 NO

Anthracene 3.9 1.10E+04 3.03E‐10 3.33E‐06 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NOBenz(a)anthracene 0.39 1.10E+04 9.32E‐11 1.02E‐06 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Benzo(a)pyrene 3.9 1.10E+04 4.16E‐11 4.57E‐07 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NOBenzo(g,h,i)perylene 3.9 1.10E+04 4.33E‐11 4.75E‐07 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Biphenyl 3.9 1.10E+04 4.38E‐10 4.81E‐06 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NOFluorene 3.9 1.10E+04 3.29E‐10 3.62E‐06 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Fluoranthene 3.9 1.10E+04 4.46E‐10 4.90E‐06 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NOIndeno(1,2,3‐c,d)pyrene 0.39 1.10E+04 2.50E‐11 2.74E‐07 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Naphthalene 0.12 1.10E+04 3.80E‐09 4.18E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.01 0.00 10 NOPhenanthrene 3.9 1.10E+04 1.39E‐09 1.52E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.02 10 NO

Pyrene 3.9 1.10E+04 6.16E‐10 6.76E‐06 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.01 10 NOSubtotal 0.05 10 NO

CHAR2 Acenaphthene 3.9 1.69E+05 2.67E‐11 4.50E‐06 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NOAcenaphthylene 3.9 1.69E+05 6.72E‐10 1.13E‐04 271 1 350 70 25550 0.03 0.11 10 NO

Anthracene 3.9 1.69E+05 1.94E‐10 3.28E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.01 0.03 10 NOBenz(a)anthracene 0.39 1.69E+05 5.97E‐11 1.01E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Benzo(a)pyrene 3.9 1.69E+05 2.67E‐11 4.50E‐06 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NOBenzo(g,h,i)perylene 3.9 1.69E+05 2.77E‐11 4.68E‐06 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Biphenyl 3.9 1.69E+05 2.80E‐10 4.74E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.01 0.05 10 NOFluorene 3.9 1.69E+05 2.11E‐10 3.57E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.01 0.04 10 NO

Fluoranthene 3.9 1.69E+05 2.86E‐10 4.83E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.01 0.05 10 NOIndeno(1,2,3‐c,d)pyrene 0.39 1.69E+05 1.60E‐11 2.70E‐06 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Naphthalene 0.12 1.69E+05 2.44E‐09 4.12E‐04 271 1 350 70 25550 0.11 0.01 10 NOPhenanthrene 3.9 1.69E+05 8.89E‐10 1.50E‐04 271 1 350 70 25550 0.04 0.15 10 NO

Pyrene 3.9 1.69E+05 3.95E‐10 6.66E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.02 0.07 10 NOSubtotal 0.53 10 NO

STCK1 DPM 1.1 2.90E+00 2.83E‐05 8.21E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.02 0.02 10 NOSTCK2 DPM 1.1 2.25E+00 2.83E‐05 6.37E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.02 0.02 10 NOHHDT1 DPM 1.1 1.08E+03 2.53E‐08 2.72E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.01 0.01 10 NOHHDT2 DPM 1.1 7.47E+03 1.26E‐08 9.44E‐05 271 1 350 70 25550 0.02 0.03 10 NOMHDT DPM 1.1 7.47E+03 2.24E‐08 1.68E‐04 271 1 350 70 25550 0.04 0.05 10 NOTRU1 DPM 1.1 1.08E+03 1.76E‐10 1.89E‐07 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NOTRU2 DPM 1.1 7.47E+03 8.79E‐11 6.57E‐07 271 1 350 70 25550 0.00 0.00 10 NO

Total 0.71 10 NO




t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

B‐3. Dispersion Modeling for Localized Significance Thresholds

80 South Lake, Suite 570, Pasadena, California 91101 INTERNET www.pcrnet.com TEL 626.204.6170 FAX 626.204.6171

MemorandumTO: CityofLosAngelesDepartmentofCity Planning DATE: October22,2015CC: FROM: HeidiRous,CPP

AlanSako,LEEDAPBD+CRE: PALLADIUM RESIDENCES PROJECT – DISPERSION MODELING FOR CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL LOCALIZED

SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS (LST) ANALYSIS Summary

The localized significance thresholds (LST) analysis for the Palladium ResidencesProjectwas provided in Section 4.B, Air Quality, of the Draft Environmental Impact Report(EIR)(seeTable4.B‐4onpage4.B‐41,Table4.B‐5onpage4.B‐43,andTable4.B‐6onpage4.B‐44.). The localizedanalysis includedemissions to account for thePalladiumenhancements,whicharepartoftheProject.Thatis,Projectimprovementswithintheentire3.6acreProjectSitewas taken into account. Themethodology for analyzing localized air quality impacts isbasedon emissions criteria establishedby the SouthCoastAirQualityManagementDistrict(SCAQMD) in itsFinalLocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodology.1 TheemissionscriteriaarebasedonthelocationoftheProjectSite,distancetosensitivereceptors,andsizeofProjectSite. The analysis in theDraftEIR is appropriatelybasedon theProject’s 3.6 acre size anddetermined that theProject’s localized constructionandoperational impacts at existingandfuturesensitivereceptorswouldbelessthansignificant.

TheSCAQMDalsoprovidesforarefinedLSTanalysisusingdispersionmodeling. Forillustrativepurposes,modelingusing theAERMODdispersionmodelhasbeenperformed toidentify thepotential localized constructionandoperational impactson the1.87acresarea,exclusiveof thearea inwhich thePalladiumbuilding is located. Theadditional refinedLSTanalysisusingdispersionmodelingalsoconcludesthattheProject’slocalizedconstructionandoperational impacts would not exceed the significance thresholds and would be less thansignificant.AstheadditionalrefineddispersionmodelinganalysisreconfirmstheconclusionspreviouslydisclosedintheDraftEIR,recirculationoftheDraftEIRisnotwarranted.DetailsoftheadditionalLSTanalysisusingdispersionmodelingareprovidedbelow.

1 SouthCoastAirQualityManagementDistrict,FinalLocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodology,AppendixC

(2006).

MemorandumRE: PALLADIUM RESIDENCES PROJECT – DISPERSION MODELING FOR

CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE

THRESHOLDS (LST) ANALYSIS

PCR Services Corporation Page 2 October 22, 2015

LSTDispersionModelingApproach

Localizedconcentrationsofnitrogendioxide(NO2),carbonmonoxide(CO),respirableparticulate matter (PM10), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) due to construction andoperation of the Project were analyzed using methods described in the SCAQMD FinalLocalized Significance Threshold Methodology. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA)andSCAQMD‐approveddispersionmodel,AERMOD,2wasusedtomodelthelocalizedimpacts of nitrogen oxide (NOX), CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions. AERMOD estimates airpollutantconcentrationsof singleormultiplepoint,area,orvolumesourcesusinghistoricalmeteorological conditions. Point sources are used to represent emissions from stationarysources, such as stacks or vents and take into account buoyancy effects from plumetemperature and flow rate and effects from building downwash. Area sources are two‐dimensionalsourcesthatareusedtorepresentemissionsthatoccuroverawidearea.Volumesourcesare similar toareasources,butare three‐dimensional sourcesofemissions thatareusedtomodelemissionsfromavarietyofequipment.

With respect to construction, emissions of were modeled as line‐volume sources torepresentheavy‐dutyconstructionequipmentoperatingthroughoutthesite.Forthepurposeofthedispersionmodeling,themaximumdailyemissionsthatcouldoccurduetoconstructionactivities from any construction phase were selected for the LST analysis. Constructionemissions would occur during the daytime hours and not during the nighttime hours (themaximumdaily localizedemissionswerenotassociatedwith theone to twodaycontinuousconcretepour).Allconstructionsourcesofemissionswerelocatedintheapproximately1.87acre area of the Project site, which excludes the area in which the Palladium building islocated. The only exception was construction emissions associated with the proposedrehabilitationofthePalladium,whichwaslocatedonthePalladiumbuilding.

Withrespecttooperations,buildingnaturalgascombustionandcharbroilingemissionsweremodeled as area sources for the retail and restaurant uses since the emissionswouldoccuroverawidearea.Buildingnaturalgascombustionemissionsweremodeledasvolumesources for the residential towers since the emissionswould occur over awide area and alarge vertical extent. Landscaping combustion emissions were modeled as an area sourcecoveringovertheapproximately1.87acrearea(ProjectSiteareaexcludingtheareainwhichthe Palladium building is located). Parking structure emissions were modeled as an areasource and incorporate several conservative assumptions. It was assumed the all parkingstructure‐related combustion emissions from automobiles entering and exiting would beconcentratedatsinglelevel(i.e.,areasource)ratherthandispersedverticallyoveravolume.

2 LakesEnvironmental,AERMODVIEWSoftware.





Also, itwasassumedthatallparkingstructure‐relatedcombustionemissionswouldoccuratthe above‐ground portion of the parking structure nearest to the downwind sensitivereceptors to the east of the Project Site. These assumptionswould result in overestimateddownwind concentrations at sensitive receptors, and thus, provides for a conservative andhealth‐protective analysis. Emissions from the two emergency generators as a result ofmaintenanceandtestingweremodeledasstationarypointsources.Buoyancyeffectsfromtheexhaust plume temperature and flow rate and effects from building downwash wereincorporated into the stackemissions from theemergencygenerators. Incidental emissionsfromon‐site idlingofmedium‐andheavy‐duty trucksand transportationrefrigerationunits(TRUs) were also included as the analysis as area sources since emissions would occurperiodicallyduringthedayat loading/unloadingareas. Alloperationalsourcesofemissionswere located inside theapproximately1.87acreareaof theProject site,whichexcludes thearea in which the Palladium building is located. The only exceptions were the proposedPalladium retail uses, which were located on the southwest and southeast corners of thePalladium building. For the purpose of the dispersion modeling, building natural gascombustionemissionswereassumed tooccur throughout thedaytimeandnighttimehours.Restaurant charbroiling emissions would occur during the daytime and evening hours.Landscaping,emergencygeneratormaintenanceandtesting,andtruck/TRUemissionswouldoccurduringthedaytimehours. Pollutantswithshort‐term1‐houraveragingstandards(i.e.,NO2 and CO) were evaluated based on peak hour emissions. Pollutants with longer‐termaveragingstandards(i.e.,CO,PM10,andPM2.5)wereevaluatedbasedondailyemissions.

Sensitive receptorswere represented as Cartesian grid receptors andwereplaced at20‐meterintervalsoutsidetheboundaryoftheProjectSiteatsensitivereceptor locationstocovernearbyexistingandpotential futuresensitivereceptors. MeteorologicaldatafromthemonitoringstationlocatedinSourceReceptorArea1(CentralLosAngelesCounty)wasusedintheanalysis. ThemeteorologicaldatawereobtainedfromtheSCAQMDwebsiteandhavebeenpreprocessedusingAERMET.3AERMETisameteorologicalpreprocessorfororganizingavailablemeteorologicaldataintoaformatsuitableforuseinAERMODairqualitydispersionmodel.4 These files were also developed by the SCAQMD using site specific surfacecharacteristics (i.e., surface albedo, surface roughness, and Bowen ratio) obtained usingAERSURFACE. AERSURFACE is a tool that provides realistic and reproducible surfacecharacteristic values, includingalbedo,Bowen ratio, and surface roughness length, for input

3 South CoastAirQualityManagementDistrict,Meteorological Sites, http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/air‐

quality‐data‐studies/meteorological‐data/aermod‐table‐1.AccessedOctober2015.4 U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,User’sGuide for theAERMODMeteorologicalPreprocessor (AERMET),

(2004)iv.





into AERMET.5 The SCAQMD provides five years of meteorological data files for use inAERMOD (from 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, and 2011), which is representative of typicalmeteorologicalconditionsintheProjectarea.

TheSCAQMDrequiresthatAERMODberunusingU.S.EPAregulatorydefaultoptions,unlessnon‐defaultoptionsare justified. AERMODwasrunusingU.S.EPAregulatorydefaultoptions including: (1)urbandispersion(LosAngelesCountypopulationof9,862,049,asperSCAQMDguidance);(2)pollutantaveragingperiodsof1‐hourforCOandNO2,8‐hourforCO,and24‐hourforPM10andPM2.5;and(3)buildingdownwashforpointsources.TheconversionofNOXemissionstoNO2concentrationsisbasedonthemethodprovidedintheSCAQMDFinalLocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodology. TheNOX toNO2conversion isappliedonly tothemodeledconcentrations(andnotthebackgroundconcentrations).

On‐SiteConstructionEmissions

AspertheSCAQMDLSTMethodology,emissionsfromon‐siteconstructionequipmentandactivitywereconsideredintheanalysis.Theemissionstakeintoaccountcompliancewiththe revised Project Design Feature PDF‐GHG‐1, which requires the use of heavy‐dutyconstruction equipment thatmeets the CARB/USEPA Tier 4 standards in lieu of the Tier 3standardsandtheuseofcertainpiecesofequipmentthatwouldbeelectricratherthandiesel‐fueled (PDF‐GHG‐1was initially included on page 4.B‐38 of theDraft EIR in theAirQualitysectionandonpage4.E‐33intheGreenhouseGasEmissionssectionhasbeenrevisedintheFinalEIRMMRPasshowninSectionD,CorrectionsandAdditionsoftheEIRErrata1).Table1, Estimated Mitigated On‐Site Construction Emissions, presents the estimated on‐siteconstructionemissionsforNOX,CO,PM10,andPM2.5.

On‐SiteOperationalEmissions

Emissions from on‐site operational equipment and activity were considered in theanalysis. The Project, as described in the Draft EIR, included two development options toprovideflexibility forchangingmarketconditions. TheApplicant isno longerproposingthedevelopmentofOption2;therefore,localizedoperationalimpactsweremodeledforOption1asdescribed intheDraftEIR.Table2,EstimatedOn‐SiteOperationalEmissions,presents theestimatedon‐siteoperationalemissionsforNOX,CO,PM10,andPM2.5.

5 U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,AERSURFACEUser’sGuide,(2008)1.





Table 1

Estimated Mitigated On‐Site Construction Emissions (pounds per day) a

Source NOX CO PM10 b PM2.5

b

On‐SiteConstruction 6.61 38.31 2.43 1.37On‐SiteRehabilitation 1.39 1.34 0.15 0.07

a The calculation worksheets are provided in Attachment A of this memorandum. b PM10 and PM2.5 emissions estimates are based on compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements for fugitive

dust suppression. Source: PCR Services Corporation, 2015

Table 2

Estimated On‐Site Operational Emissions (pounds per day) a

Source

Pounds Per Peak Hour Pounds Per Day

NOX CO CO PM10 PM2.5

DraftEIROption1 Area(Landscaping) 0.088 7.593 60.75 0.332 0.332Energy(NaturalGas) 0.142 0.069 1.663 0.274 0.274Stationary(Charbroiling) — — — 0.854 0.854Stationary(EmergencyGenerator) 5.913 30.75 61.49 0.237 0.237MotorVehicles(ParkingStructure) 0.041 0.494 2.753 0.021 0.020MotorVehicles(On‐SiteIdlingTrucks) 0.066 0.032 0.255 0.001 0.001TRUs(On‐SiteIdling) 0.007 1.460 3.650 <0.001 <0.001

a The calculation worksheets are provided in Attachment B of this memorandum. Source: PCR Services Corporation, 2015





SignificanceThresholds

Inaccordancewith theSCAQMDFinalLocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodology, localizedconstructionandoperationalimpactswouldbeconsideredsignificantifthefollowingwouldoccur:

Maximum daily localized emissions are greater than the Localized Significance Thresholds(LST), resulting inpredictedambientconcentrations in thevicinityof theProjectsitegreaterthanthemoststringentambientairqualitystandardsforCOandNO2.

MaximumlocalizedPM10orPM2.5emissionsduringconstructionaregreaterthantheapplicableLSTs, resulting in predicted ambient concentrations in the vicinity of the site to exceed 50μg/m3overfivehours(SCAQMDRule403controlrequirement).TomeasurecompliancewiththeLocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodology, the threshold forPM10andPM2.5measuredovera24‐houraveragingperiodis10.4microgramspercubicmeter(µg/m3).

Maximum localizedPM10orPM2.5 emissionsduringoperationaregreater than theapplicableLSTs, resulting in predicted ambient concentrations in the vicinity of the site to exceed 2.5μg/m3measuredovera24‐houraveragingperiod(SCAQMDRule1303requirement).

ThesignificancethresholdsforNO2andCOarebasedontheambientairqualitystandardsandambient background concentrations ofNO2 and CO, respectively, for the recent three year period inwhichdataisavailablefromtheSCAQMD(2012‐2014).Thebackgroundconcentrationsarebasedonthemaximum of the recent three year period forwhich data is available from the SCAQMD for theCentral Los Angeles County Monitoring Station (2012‐2014), which is the monitoring station mostrepresentativeoftheProjectSite.AsummaryofthebackgroundconcentrationsareprovidedinTable3,BackgroundNO2andCOConcentrations.

LSTDispersionModelingResults

Construction

DispersionmodelingusingAERMODwasconductedtoestimatethemaximumpollutantconcentrationsfromlocalizedProjectemissionsatthenearestsensitivereceptors.TheresultsofthelocalizedconstructionairqualityanalysisareshowninTable4,LocalizedConstructionImpacts.Asshown,maximumlocalizedon‐siteconstructionemissionsforsensitivereceptorswouldnotexceedthelocalizedthresholdsforNOX,CO,PM10andPM2.5.Therefore,withrespecttolocalizedon‐siteconstructionemissions,impactswouldbelessthansignificant.





Table 3

Background NO2 and CO Concentrations

Pollutant Averaging Period

Background Concentrations a (µ/m3)

2012 2013 2014 LST Ambient Background

NO2 1‐hr 145.3 169.8 154.4 169.8

NO21‐hr(3yearaverageofthe

98thpercentile) 129.5 117.7 126.7 124.6

CO 1‐hr 2,518 2,861 2,861 2,861CO 8‐hr 2,174 2,289 2,289 2,289

a See SCAQMD website: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/air‐quality‐data‐studies/historical‐data‐by‐year. The CO concentrations are based on data from the same time period from the USEPA. See USEPA website: http://www.epa.gov/airdata/ad_rep_mon.html.


Table 4

Localized Construction Impacts

Pollutant Averaging

Period

Project Concentration a

(µ/m3)

LST Ambient Background

(µ/m3) Total

(µ/m3) Threshold

(µ/m3) Exceed

Threshold?

NO2 1‐hr 15.68 169.8 185.4 339 No

NO21‐hr(98thPercentile)

14.42 124.6 139.1 188 No

CO 1‐hr 148.4 2,861 3,009 23,000 NoCO 8‐hr 41.33 2,289 2,330 10,000 NoPM10 24‐hr 1.29 — 1.29 10.4 NoPM2.5 24‐hr 0.73 — 0.73 10.4 No

a Project concentrations are based on the results from the AERMOD dispersion model. NO2 concentrations are based on NOX to NO2 conversion ratios in the SCAQMD Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology.






Operations

DispersionmodelingusingAERMODwasconductedtoestimatethemaximumpollutantconcentrationsfromlocalizedProjectemissionsatthenearestsensitivereceptors.Theresultsof the localizedoperational airquality analysis are shown inTable5,LocalizedOperationalImpacts. Asshown,maximumlocalizedon‐siteoperationalemissionsforsensitivereceptorswouldnotexceedthelocalizedthresholdsforNOX,CO,PM10andPM2.5.Therefore,withrespecttolocalizedon‐siteoperationemissions,impactswouldbelessthansignificant.

Conclusion

A refined LST analysis using the AERMOD dispersion model was conducted inaccordancewiththeSCAQMDFinalLocalizedSignificanceThresholdMethodology.TherefinedLSTanalysisusingdispersionmodelingconcludesthattheProject’slocalizedconstructionandoperational impacts would be less than significant. As the additional refined dispersionmodelinganalysis reconfirms the conclusionsdisclosed in theDraftEIR, recirculationof theDraftEIRisnotwarranted.

Table 5

Localized Operational Impacts

Pollutant Averaging

Period

Project Concentration a

(µ/m3)

Ambient Background

(µ/m3) Total

(µ/m3) Threshold

(µ/m3) Exceed

Threshold?

NO2 1‐hr 1.74 169.8 171.5 339 No

NO21‐hr(98thPercentile)

1.63 124.6 126.3 188 No

CO 1‐hr 1,024 2,861 3,885 23,000 NoCO 8‐hr 209.6 2,289 2,499 10,000 NoPM10 24‐hr 2.18 — 2.18 2.5 NoPM2.5 24‐hr 2.18 — 2.18 2.5 No

a Project concentrations are based on the results from the AERMOD dispersion model. NO2 concentrations are based on NOX to NO2 conversion ratios in the SCAQMD Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology.


ATTACHMENTA

CONSTRUCTIONWORKSHEETS

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Constructio

n Localized

Significan

ce Thresho

ld Ana

lysis

AERM

OD Sou

rce Ch

aracteristics

Emission Source

Source

Release

Length

Length

Initial

Initial

Exit

Insid

eExit Flow

Type

Height

of Side X

of Side Y

Lateral

Vertical

Temp

Diam

eter

Rate

(m)

(m)

(m)

(m)

(m)

(°F)

(ft)

(ft3 /s)

On‐Site Con

struction Em

issions

Volume

5.00

5.00

519.90

11.63

1.16

n/a

n/a

n/a

Rehabilitation

Volume

5.00

5.00

366.80

11.63

1.16

n/a

n/a

n/a

Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 201

5

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Constructio

n Localized

Significan

ce Thresho

ld Ana

lysis

AERM

OD Sou

rce Em

ission

Rates

Emissions

Source

Source

Averaging

Emission Ra

tes (pe

r each source)

Source

IDType

Perio

d(hou

rs/day)

(lbs/day)

(g/s)

(lbs/day)

(g/s)

(lbs/day)

(g/s)

(lbs/day)

(g/s)

Unm

itigated

On‐Site Con

struction

CONST

Volume

14

6.61

5.95

E‐02

38.31

3.45

E‐01

2.43

2.18

E‐02

1.37

1.23

E‐02

Rehabilitation

REHA

BVo

lume

14

1.39

1.25

E‐02

1.34

1.21

E‐02

0.15

1.35

E‐03

0.07

6.30

E‐04

Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 201

5

NOX

COPM

10PM

2.5

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Constructio

n Localized

Significan

ce Thresho

ld Ana

lysis

LST Im

pacts: Unm

itigated Co

nstructio

nProject C

oncentratio

ns (µ

g/m

3 )Source

NO2

COPM

10PM

2.5

Project O

n‐Site Con

struction Em

ission

s a

1‐ho

ur average

15.68

148.4

——

1‐ho

ur average (3

‐year a

vg of 9

8th pe

r.)14

.42

——

—8‐ho

ur average

—41

.33

——

24‐hou

r average

——

1.29

0.73

Backgrou

nd NOx and CO

(µg/m

3 )Ba

ckgrou

nd b

2012

2013

2014

1‐ho

ur average

169.8

2,86

1

——

NOx 1‐hr

145.33

169.77

154.35

1‐ho

ur average (3

‐year a

vg of 9

8th pe

r.)12

4.6

——

—NOx 1‐hr 98th p

129.53

117.69

126.71

8‐ho

ur average

—2,28

9

——

NOx 3‐yr avg. of

24‐hou

r average

——

——

CO 1‐hr

2,51

8

2,86

1

2,86

1

Total (Project +

Backgroun

d)CO

8‐hr

2,17

4

2,28

9

2,28

9

1‐ho

ur average

185.4

3,00

9

——

1‐ho

ur average (3

‐year a

vg of 9

8th pe

r.)13

9.1

——

—8‐ho

ur average

—2,33

0

——

24‐hou

r average

——

1.29

0.73

Localized

Significan

ce Thresho

lds

1‐ho

ur average

339.0

23,000

——

1‐ho

ur average (3

‐year a

vg of 9

8th pe

r.)18

8.0

——

—8‐ho

ur average

—10

,000

——

24‐hou

r average

——

10.4

10.4

Exceed

s Th

resholds?

1‐ho

ur average

NO

NO

——

1‐ho

ur average (3

‐year a

vg of 9

8th pe

r.)NO

——

—8‐ho

ur average

—NO

——

24‐hou

r average

——

NO

NO

Notes:

a.Ba

sed on

the results from

the AE

RMOD dispersio

n mod

el. NO2 concen

trations are based

on NOx to NO2 conversio

n ratio

s in the SCAQ

MD Final Localize

d Significance Threshold Metho

dology.

b. Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 2015

Backgrou

nd con

centratio

ns are based

on the maxim

um of the

most recen

t three

years fo

r which data is available from

the SCAQ

MD for the

Lake Elsin

ore Mon

itorin

g Station (2011‐2013). See

SCAQ

MD web

site: http://www.aqm

d.gov/ho

me/library/air‐qu

ality

‐data‐stud

ies/historical‐data‐by

‐year. The

1‐hou

r CO con

centratio

n is based on

data from

the same tim

e pe

riod from

the

USEPA

. See USEPA

web

site: http://www.epa.gov/aird

ata/ad_rep

_mon

.htm

l.

124.64


Construction Localized Significance Threshold Analysis

NOx to NO2 Conversion

Downwind Distance (m) NO2/NOx Ratio Slope (20‐50 m) 0.0002 /m20 0.05350 0.059 Closest Receptor 33.25 m70 0.064 NO2/NOx Ratio 0.05565

100 0.074 0.05565200 0.114500 0.258

1000 0.4672000 0.753000 0.94000 0.9785000 1

Source: SCAQMD. Final Localized Significance

Threshold Methodology. June 2003.

ATTACHMENTB

OPERATIONALWORKSHEETS

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Ope

ratio

nal Localized

Significan

ce Thresho

ld Ana

lysis

Truck/TR

U/Emergency Gen

erator/Cha

rbroiling

Sou

rce Pa

rameters:

Med

ium‐Duty De

livery Trucks

Num

ber o

f Med

ium‐Duty Trucks (T

6)24

trucks/day


hours/day

Trucks per Hou

r3

trucks/hou


Idling Time

5

min/truck

Assumed

value.

Heavy‐Du

ty Delivery Trucks

Num

ber o

f Heavy‐Duty Trucks (T

7)24

trucks/day


hours/day

Trucks per Hou

r3

trucks/hou


Idling Time

5

min/truck

Transportatio

n Re

firgerator U

nits (T

RUs)

Num

ber o

f TRU

s5

TRUs/day

Assumed

value (20% of heavy‐duty trucks equipped

with TRU).

TRUs p

er Hou

r2

TRU/hou

rAssumed

value.

Idling Time

60

min/TRU

Assumed

value (1 hour per TRU).

Emergency Gen

erators

Num

ber o

f Gen

erators

2

gene

rators

Based on Project inform

ation received.

Ratin

g2,00

0

kWBased on Project inform

ation received.

2,68

2

hpBased on Project inform

ation received.

Mainten

ance/testin

g ho

urs

2

hours/gene

rator/day

Assumed

value.

100

hours/gene

rator/year

Upper limit based on CARB Air Toxics Control M

easure (requires compliance with 0.01 grams/bhp‐hr lim

it for DPM).

Charbroiling

Poun

ds of C

harbroiled Ch

icken

116.5

po

unds/day

Based on SCAQMD Staff Report (1997) that found an average of 233 pounds of meat charbroiled per large restaurant

Poun

ds of C

harbroiled Be

ef11

6.5

po

unds/day

(large chain‐driven charbroiler operations), and assumes 50% chicken and 50% beef.

Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 201

4.

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Ope

ratio

nal Localized

Significan

ce Thresho

ld Ana

lysis

Delivery Truck Em

ission

s:


Factors fo

r Run

ning

Exhau

st and

Idlin

gIdling Em

ission Factor

Calend

arEM

FAC2

011

(grams/veh‐hr)

Truck Type

Year

Veh. Class

NOX

COPM

10PM

2.5

Med

ium‐Duty Truck

2018

T6 instate sm

all

66.931

6

22.050

4

0.20

51

0.18

87

Heavy‐Du

ty Truck

2018

T7 tractor

52.000

9

35.785

4

0.12

27

0.11

29


s from Id

ling

Idling Time

Idling Em

issions

Calend

arNum

ber o

fpe

r Truck

(pou

nds/ho

ur)

Truck Type

Year

Hours1

Trucks

(minutes)

NOX

COPM

10PM

2.5

Med

ium‐Duty Truck

Peak Hou

r20

181

35.00

3.68

9E‐02

1.21

5E‐02

1.13

1E‐04

1.04

0E‐04

Day (M

ax)

2018

824

5.00

3.68

9E‐02

1.21

5E‐02

1.13

1E‐04

1.04

0E‐04

Heavy‐Du

ty Truck

Peak Hou

r20

181

35.00

2.86

6E‐02

1.97

2E‐02

6.76

1E‐05

6.22

0E‐05

Day (M

ax)

2018

824

5.00

2.86

6E‐02

1.97

2E‐02

6.76

1E‐05

6.22

0E‐05

Subtotal Pou

nds p

er Peak Ho

ur:

0.06

560.03

190.00

020.00

02Subtotal Pou

nds p

er Day:

0.52

440.25

500.00

140.00

13Note:


e over an 8 ho


e de

liveries).

Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 201

5

Source: C

alifo

rnia Air Re

sources B

oard, EMFA

C201

1. M

odel param

eters: Sou

th Coast Air Quality Managem

ent D

istrict, aggregated

mod

el years and

speeds, ann

ual average emission factors.

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Ope

ratio

nal Localized

Significan

ce Thresho

ld Ana

lysis

Tran

sportatio

n Re

frigeration Unit E

mission

s:

Tran

sportatio

n Re


U) E

mission

Factors

Calend

arTo

tal

Total N

OX

Total PM

Emission Factor (lbs/hr) 1,

2

Equipm

ent T

ype

Year

Fleet H

ours

(tpy)

(tpy)

NOX

COPM

10PM

2.5

TRU

2018

275,12

0,51

6

11.641

0

0.27

42

3.43

9E‐03

7.30

0E‐01

1.99

3E‐06

1.99

3E‐06

Sources:

1.NOX & PM: C

alifo

rnia Air Re

sources B

oard, 201

1 Transportatio

n Re


U) R

egulation, 201

1 Em

issions Inventory Da

tabase (w

ith ado

pted

201

1 am

endm

ents).

2.CO

: National Ren

ewable Ene

rgy Labo

ratory, Emissions of T

ranspo

rt Refrig

eration Units with

CAR

B Diesel, G

as‐to‐Liqu

id Diesel, and Em

issions Con

trol Devices, M

ay 201

0.

Tran

sportatio

n Re


U) E

mission

sIdling Time

Idling Em

issions

Calend

arNum

ber

per T

RU(pou

nds/ho

ur)

Equipm

ent T

ype

Year

Hours1

of TRU

s(m

inutes)

NOX

COPM

10PM

2.5

TRU (o

n‐site idling)

Peak Hou

r20

181

260

6.87

8E‐03

1.46

0E+00

3.98

6E‐06

3.98

6E‐06

Day (M

ax)

2018

85

602.15

0E‐03

4.56

3E‐01

1.24

6E‐06

1.24

6E‐06

Subtotal Pou

nds p

er Day:

0.01

723.65

09.97

E‐06

9.97

E‐06

Note:


e over an 8 ho


e de

liveries).

Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 201

5


Operational Localized Significance Threshold Analysis

Diesel Emergency Generator EmissionsMaintenance/Testing Emissions

(pounds/hour)Equipment Type Hours 1 NOX CO PM10 PM2.5

Emergency GeneratorsPeak Hour 1 5.913E+00 3.075E+01 1.183E‐01 1.183E‐01Day (Max) 8 1.478E+00 7.687E+00 2.956E‐02 2.956E‐02

Subtotal Pounds per Day: 11.83 61.49 0.2365 0.2365Note:

1. Assumes maintenance and testing would occur during the daytime hours (i.e., no evening or nighttime maintenance and testing).




Charbroiling EmissionsCharbroiling Emissions


CharbroilingPeak Hour 1 ‐ ‐ 7.118E‐02 7.118E‐02Day (Max) 12 ‐ ‐ 7.118E‐02 7.118E‐02

Subtotal Pounds per Day: ‐ ‐ 0.8542 0.8542Note:

1. Assumes charbroiling would occur during daytime and evening hours.




Building Natural Gas Emissions (from CalEEMod)Building Natural Gas Emissions


Building Natural GasDEIR Option 1

WT ‐ West TowerPeak Hour 1 5.891E‐02 2.654E‐02 4.746E‐03 4.746E‐03Day (Max) 24 5.891E‐02 2.654E‐02 4.746E‐03 4.746E‐03

ET ‐ East TowerPeak Hour 1 7.041E‐02 3.172E‐02 5.672E‐03 5.672E‐03Day (Max) 24 7.041E‐02 3.172E‐02 5.672E‐03 5.672E‐03

RET1 ‐ Retail/RestaurantPeak Hour 1 1.279E‐02 1.074E‐02 9.708E‐04 9.708E‐04Day (Max) 24 1.279E‐02 1.074E‐02 9.708E‐04 9.708E‐04

RET2 ‐ RetailPeak Hour 1 1.592E‐04 1.338E‐04 1.208E‐05 1.208E‐05Day (Max) 24 1.592E‐04 1.338E‐04 1.208E‐05 1.208E‐05

PR ‐ Palladium RetailPeak Hour 1 1.767E‐04 1.483E‐04 1.333E‐05 1.333E‐05Day (Max) 24 1.767E‐04 1.483E‐04 1.333E‐05 1.333E‐05

Option 1 Subtotal Pounds per Peak Hour: 0.142 0.069 0.0114 0.0114Option 1 Subtotal Pounds per Day: 3.419 1.663 0.2739 0.2739

Project: PalladiumSource: EMFAC2014Parking Structure Emissions (Vehicles Entering/Exiting)

A B C D EEmission Factors (grams/mile) a CO NOX PM10 PM2.5 MPH2018 LDA (All Fuel Types) 1.6052 0.1316 0.0124 0.0114 5 Note:a. Emission factors are based on exhaust emissions from EMFAC2014 for year 2018, South Coast Air Basin, LDA, 5 MPH.

Project (DEIR Option 1)(A*E*F*G*H)/60/3600

(B*E*F*G*H)/60/3600

(C*E*F*G*H)/60/3600

(D*E*F*G*H)/60/3600 F G H

Peak Hour Emissions Rate (grams/second) CO NOX PM10 PM2.5

Peak Hourly Trip Rate per Unit Unit Minutes

Residential 0.0516 0.0042 0.0004 0.0004 0.38 731 5 Sit Down Restaurant 0.0063 0.0005 0.0000 0.0000 6.80 5 5 Shopping Center 0.0020 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 1.22 9 5 Palladium Retail 0.0022 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 1.20 10 5 Total 6.22E‐02 5.10E‐03 4.79E‐04 4.42E‐04Total (pounds per hour) 0.4940 0.0405 0.0038 0.0035

(A*E*J*K*L)/24/60/3600

(B*E*J*K*L)/24/60/3600

(C*E*J*K*L)/24/60/3600

(D*E*J*K*L)/24/60/3600 J K L

Daily Emissions Rate (grams/second) CO NOX PM10 PM2.5

Daily Trip Rate per Unit Unit Minutes

Residential 0.0119 0.0010 0.0001 0.0001 4.20 731 2.5 Sit Down Restaurant 0.0015 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 77.80 5 2.5 Shopping Center 0.0005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 14.44 9 2.5 Palladium Retail 0.0006 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 14.50 10 2.5 Total 1.45E‐02 1.18E‐03 1.11E‐04 1.03E‐04Total (pounds per day) 2.7531 0.2257 0.0212 0.0195



Parking Structure (from "Parking Structure Emissions" worksheet)Parking Structure Emissions

(pounds/hour)Equipment Type Hours NOX CO PM10 PM2.5

Parking StructureDEIR Option 1

Peak Hour 1 4.050E‐02 4.940E‐01 3.803E‐03 3.506E‐03Day (Max) 24 9.405E‐03 1.147E‐01 8.832E‐04 8.141E‐04

Option 1 Subtotal Pounds per Day: 0.2257 2.753 0.0212 0.0195Source: PCR Services Corporation, 2015

Landscaping (from CalEEMod)Landscaping Emissions


LandscapingDEIR Option 1

Peak Hour 1 8.813E‐02 7.593E+00 4.144E‐02 4.144E‐02Day (Max) 8 8.813E‐02 7.593E+00 4.144E‐02 4.144E‐02

Option 1 Subtotal Pounds per Day: 0.7050 60.75 0.3315 0.3315Note:

1. Assumes landscaping would occur during the daytime hours (i.e., no evening or nighttime landscaping).




AERMOD Source PropertiesInitial

Release Exhaust Exhaust Vertical AreaAERMOD Source Height Temp Flow Dimension DescriptionSource ID Type (m) (°F) (acfm) (m) (meters2)

CHAR1 Area 3 – – – Charbroiling emissions, southwest corner 625 CHAR2 Area 3 – – – Charbroiling emissions, northeast side 975 STCK1 Point 106.7 987 19,209 – Generator emissions, West Tower –STCK2 Point 106.7 987 19,209 – Generator emissions, East Tower –HHDT1 Area 3.0 – – – Heavy‐Duty Delivery Trucks 150 HHDT2 Area 3.0 – – – Heavy‐Duty Delivery Trucks 300 MHDT Area 3.0 – – – Medium‐Duty Delivery Trucks 300 TRU1 Area 3.0 – – – Transportation Refrigeration Units 150 TRU2 Area 3.0 – – – Transportation Refrigeration Units 300 WT1‐3 Volume 49.6 – – 49.6 Area source ‐ natural gas, West Tower –ET1‐3 Volume 49.6 – – 49.6 Area source ‐ natural gas, East Tower –RET1 Area 3 – – – Area source ‐ natural gas, West Retail 625 RET2 Area 3 – – – Area source ‐ natural gas, East Retail 975 PR1, PR2 Area 3 – – – Area source ‐ natural gas, Palladium Retail 929.0 LAND Area 3 – – – Landscaping 9,028.4 PARK Area 3 – – – Parking Struture 3,901.9

Source‐Specific Emissions FactorsSource‐Specific Emissions Factor

Source ID/ NOX CO CO PM10 PM2.5Compound (1‐hour) (1‐hour) (8‐hour) (24‐hour) (24‐hour)

(g/s) (g/s) (g/s) (g/s)

DEIR Option 1CHAR1 ‐ ‐ ‐ 4.48E‐03 4.48E‐03CHAR2 ‐ ‐ ‐ 4.48E‐03 4.48E‐03STCK1 3.73E‐01 1.94E+00 4.84E‐01 1.86E‐03 1.86E‐03STCK2 3.73E‐01 1.94E+00 4.84E‐01 1.86E‐03 1.86E‐03HHDT1 1.81E‐03 1.24E‐03 1.24E‐03 4.26E‐06 3.92E‐06HHDT2 1.81E‐03 1.24E‐03 1.24E‐03 4.26E‐06 3.92E‐06MHDT 4.65E‐03 1.53E‐03 1.53E‐03 1.42E‐05 1.31E‐05TRU1 4.33E‐04 9.20E‐02 2.87E‐02 7.85E‐08 7.85E‐08TRU2 4.33E‐04 9.20E‐02 2.87E‐02 7.85E‐08 7.85E‐08WT1, WT2, WT3 2.47E‐03 1.11E‐03 1.11E‐03 1.99E‐04 1.99E‐04ET1, ET2, ET3 2.96E‐03 1.33E‐03 1.33E‐03 2.38E‐04 2.38E‐04RET1 1.61E‐03 1.35E‐03 1.35E‐03 1.22E‐04 1.22E‐04RET2 2.01E‐05 1.69E‐05 1.69E‐05 1.52E‐06 1.52E‐06PR1 1.11E‐05 9.34E‐06 9.34E‐06 8.40E‐07 8.40E‐07PR2 1.11E‐05 9.34E‐06 9.34E‐06 8.40E‐07 8.40E‐07LAND 1.11E‐02 9.57E‐01 9.57E‐01 5.22E‐03 5.22E‐03PARK 5.10E‐03 6.22E‐02 1.45E‐02 1.11E‐04 1.03E‐04

City of Los Angeles

PALLAD

IUM RESIDEN

CES

Ope

ratio

nal Localized

Significan

ce Thresho

ld Ana

lysis

Maxim

um LST Im

pacts: Unm

itigated Ope

ratio

nsCo

ncen

trations (µ

g/m

3 )Source

NO2

COPM

10PM

2.5

Project O

peratio

ns a

1‐ho

ur average

1.72

1,02

4

——

1‐ho

ur average (3

‐year a

vg of 9

8th pe

r.)1.62

——

—8‐ho

ur average

—20

9.6

——

24‐hou

r average

——

2.18

3

2.18

2

Backgrou

nd NOx and CO

(µg/m

3 )Ba

ckgrou

nd b

2012

2013

2014

1‐ho

ur average

169.8

2,86

1

——

NOx 1‐hr

145.33

169.77

154.35

1‐ho

ur average (3

‐year a

vg of 9

8th pe

r.)12

4.6

——

—NOx 1‐hr 98th pe

r.12

9.53

117.69

126.71

8‐ho

ur average

—2,28

9

——

NOx 3‐yr avg. of 1

‐hr 9

8th pe

r.24

‐hou

r average

——

——

CO 1‐hr

2,51

8

2,86

1

2,86

1

Total (Project +

Backgroun

d)CO

8‐hr

2,17

4

2,28

9

2,28

9

1‐ho

ur average

171.5

3,88

5

——

1‐ho

ur average (3

‐year a

vg of 9

8th pe

r.)12

6.3

——

—8‐ho

ur average

—2,49

9

——

24‐hou

r average

——

2.18

3

2.18

2

Localized

Significan

ce Thresho

lds

1‐ho

ur average

339.0

23,000

——

1‐ho

ur average (3

‐year a

vg of 9

8th pe

r.)18

8.0

——

—8‐ho

ur average

—10

,000

——

24‐hou

r average

——

2.5

2.5

Exceed

s Th

resholds?

1‐ho

ur average

NO

NO

——

1‐ho

ur average (3

‐year a

vg of 9

8th pe

r.)NO

——

—8‐ho

ur average

—NO

——

24‐hou

r average

——

NO

NO

Notes:

a.Ba

sed on

the results from

the AE

RMOD dispersio

n mod

el. NO

2 con

centratio

ns are based

on NOx to NO2 conversio

n ratio

s in the SCAQ

MD Final Localized

Significance Threshold M

ethodology.

b. Source: PCR

Services C

orpo

ratio

n, 201

5

Backgrou

nd con

centratio

ns are based

on the maxim

um of the

recent th

ree year period for w

hich data is available from

the SCAQ

MD for the

Cen

tral Los Angeles Cou

nty Mon

itorin

g Station (201

2‐20

14). See

SCAQ

MD web

site: http://www.aqm

d.gov/ho

me/library/air‐qu

ality

‐data‐stud

ies/historical‐data‐by

‐year. The

CO con

centratio

ns are based

on data from

the same tim

e pe

riod from

the USEPA

. See USEPA

web

site:

http://w

ww.epa.gov/aird

ata/ad_rep

_mon

.htm

l.

124.64


NOx to NO2 Conversion

Downwind Distance (m) NO2/NOx Ratio20 0.05350 0.059 Distance to Max Impact Receptor 75 meters70 0.064 NO2/NOx Ratio 0.066 100 0.074200 0.114500 0.2581000 0.4672000 0.753000 0.94000 0.9785000 1

Source: SCAQMD. Final Localized Significance

Threshold Methodology. June 2003.

t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

Appendix C: Noise Addendum, Update to Draft EIR Appendix H

C‐1. Calculation Sheet for Construction Noise at the LeBon Hotel

Project: Palladium Residences

Construction Phase: Phase 3Building Construction

Equipment

DescriptionNo. of Equip.

Reference Noise Level at

50ft, LmaxAcoustical

Usage FactorDistance to Receptor, ft

Estimated Noise Shielding, dBA

Chain Saw 1 85 20% 200 0Cranes 1 81 40% 200 0Other Equipment 1 85 50% 200 0Forklift 1 75 10% 200 0Concrete Pump Trucks 1 81 20% 200 0Rubber Tired Loader 1 79 50% 200 0Skid Steer Loaders 1 80 40% 200 0Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1 80 25% 200 0Aerial Lift 1 75 20% 200 0Generator Sets 1 81 50% 200 0

Receptor: R4

Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm)

0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm)

0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am)

Results:Leq: 75

Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005

H:\PROJECTS\Acoustics\Active Projects\Palladium Residences EIR\Calculations\Construction\Construction - Palladium 062014.xls

t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

C‐2. Corrected Version of Appendix H‐1.3.

Off-

Site

Tra

ffic

Noi

se C

alcu

latio

ns

Exis

ting

Roa

dway

/Seg

men

tA

MPM

AD

TR

OW

25 F

eet

50 F

eet

RO

W25

Fee

t50

Fee

tA

rgyl

e A

venu

e71

870

.067

.165

.367

.064

.162

.3S

elm

a A

venu

e71

870

.067

.165

.367

.064

.162

.3E

l Cen

tro

Ave

nue

718

70.0

67.1

65.3

67.0

64.1

62.3

Sun

set B

oule

vard

718

68.7

66.5

65.1

65.7

63.5

62.1

--0

--

--

--

Futu

re N

o Pr

ojec

t

Roa

dway

/Seg

men

tA

MPM

AD

TR

OW

25 F

eet

50 F

eet

RO

W25

Fee

t50

Fee

tA

rgyl

e A

venu

e0

--

--

--

Sel

ma

Ave

nue

0-

--

--

-E

l Cen

tro

Ave

nue

0-

--

--

-S

unse

t Bou

leva

rd0

--

--

--

--0

--

--

--

Futu

re W

ith P

roje

ct

Roa

dway

/Seg

men

tA

MPM

AD

TR

OW

25 F

eet

50 F

eet

RO

W25

Fee

t50

Fee

tA

rgyl

e A

venu

e0

--

--

--

Sel

ma

Ave

nue

0-

--

--

-E

l Cen

tro

Ave

nue

0-

--

--

-S

unse

t Bou

leva

rd0

--

--

--

--0

--

--

--

Sum

mar

y

Roa

dway

/Seg

men

tA

rgyl

e A

venu

e-

--

-S

elm

a A

venu

e-

--

-E

l Cen

tro

Ave

nue

--

--

Sun

set B

oule

vard

--

--

---

--

-

At R

OW

Proj

ect

Incr

emen

tC

umul

ativ

e In

crem

ent

Proj

ect

Incr

emen

tC

umul

ativ

e In

crem

ent

25 ft

. fro

m R

OW

CN

EL

CN

EL

CN

EL

CN

EL

Leq

Traf

fic V

olum

es

Traf

fic V

olum

es

Traf

fic V

olum

es

Leq

Leq

TE

NS

1.1

(T

ruck

s) -

Pal

ladi

um 0

6041

46/

4/20

14

t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

C‐3. Additional Input Data for Traffic Noise Analysis in Draft EIR Appendix H‐1.5

Palla

dium

Res

iden

ces

Traf

fic S

plit

Dat

a

Exis

ting Aut

oM

DT

HD

TA

uto

MD

TH

DT

Aut

oM

DT

HD

T97

.0%

2.0%

1.0%

97.0

%2.

0%1.

0%97

.0%

2.0%

1.0%

10.0

0%

100.

0%Fu

ture

No

Proj

ect

Aut

oM

DT

HD

TA

uto

MD

TH

DT

Aut

oM

DT

HD

T97

.0%

2.0%

1.0%

97.0

%2.

0%1.

0%97

.0%

2.0%

1.0%

10.0

0%

Futu

re w

ith P

roje

ct

Aut

oM

DT

HD

TA

uto

MD

TH

DT

Aut

oM

DT

HD

T97

.0%

2.0%

1.0%

97.0

%2.

0%1.

0%97

.0%

2.0%

1.0%

10.0

0%

10%

10%

80%

10%

AD

T to

Pea

k H

our R

atio

AD

T to

Pea

k H

our R

atio

AD

T to

Pea

k H

our R

atio

Day

Even

ing

Nig

ht

Nig

ht

80%

10%

Day

10%

Day

Even

ing

Nig

ht

10%

80%

Even

ing

Palla

dium

Res

iden

ces

Lane

Wid

th a

nd T

raffi

c D

ata

Driv

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)11

Park

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)9

Side

wal

k W

idth

(ft.)

6

Traf

fic D

ata

Form

at

Exis

ting

Link

Tota

l Num

ber o

f La

nes

In B

oth

Dire

ctio

ns

Cru

ise

Spee

d

Aver

age

Dai

ly T

raffi

c (A

DT)

Park

ing

Lane

Pr

esen

t?Si

dew

alk

Pres

ent?

Lane

Wid

thPa

rkin

g La

ne

Wid

thSi

dew

alk

Wid

th

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n Fr

ankl

in A

ve a

nd U

S-10

1 N

orth

boun

d O

ff-R

amp

53

55

50

6

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n H

olly

woo

d B

lvd

and

Selm

a Av

e3

35

33

96

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n Se

lma

Aven

ue a

nd S

unse

t Blv

d3

35

33

96

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n Su

nset

Blv

d an

d Fo

unta

in A

ve3

35

33

96

00

96

.W

/O P

roje

ct

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n Fr

ankl

in A

ve a

nd U

S-10

1 N

orth

boun

d O

ff-R

amp

53

55

50

6

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n H

olly

woo

d B

lvd

and

Selm

a Av

e3

35

33

96

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n Se

lma

Aven

ue a

nd S

unse

t Blv

d3

35

33

96

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n Su

nset

Blv

d an

d Fo

unta

in A

ve3

35

33

96

00

00

96

W P

roje

ct

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n Fr

ankl

in A

ve a

nd U

S-10

1 N

orth

boun

d O

ff-R

amp

53

55

50

6

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n H

olly

woo

d B

lvd

and

Selm

a Av

e3

35

33

96

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n Se

lma

Aven

ue a

nd S

unse

t Blv

d3

35

33

96

Gow

er S

tree

t bet

wee

n Su

nset

Blv

d an

d Fo

unta

in A

ve3

35

33

96

00

00

96

Tra

ffic

Stu

dy D

ate:

Oct

ober

201

4

Lane

Cou

nt (D

1, D

2) W

orks

heet

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Peak

Hou

r

ADT

Palla

dium

Res

iden

ces

Lane

Wid

th a

nd T

raffi

c D

ata

Driv

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)11

Park

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)9

Side

wal

k W

idth

(ft.)

6

Traf

fic D

ata

Form

at

Exis

ting

Link

Tota

l Num

ber o

f La

nes

In B

oth

Dire

ctio

ns

Cru

ise

Spee

d

Aver

age

Dai

ly T

raffi

c (A

DT)

Park

ing

Lane

Pr

esen

t?Si

dew

alk

P res

ent?

Lane

Wid

thPa

rkin

g La

ne

Wid

thSi

dew

alk

Wid

th

Vine

Str

eet b

etw

een

Fran

klin

Ave

and

Hol

lyw

ood

Blv

d5

35

55

96

Vine

Str

eet b

etw

een

Selm

a Av

e an

d Su

nset

Blv

d5

35

55

96

Vine

Str

eet b

etw

een

Foun

tain

Ave

and

San

ta M

onic

a B

lvd

53

55

59

6

00

96

00

96

.W

/O P

roje

ct

Vine

Str

eet b

etw

een

Fran

klin

Ave

and

Hol

lyw

ood

Blv

d5

35

55

96

Vine

Str

eet b

etw

een

Selm

a Av

e an

d Su

nset

Blv

d5

35

55

96

Vine

Str

eet b

etw

een

Foun

tain

Ave

and

San

ta M

onic

a B

lvd

53

55

59

6

00

00

96

00

00

96

W P

roje

ct

Vine

Str

eet b

etw

een

Fran

klin

Ave

and

Hol

lyw

ood

Blv

d5

35

55

96

Vine

Str

eet b

etw

een

Selm

a Av

e an

d Su

nset

Blv

d5

35

55

96

Vine

Str

eet b

etw

een

Foun

tain

Ave

and

San

ta M

onic

a B

lvd

53

55

59

6

00

00

96

00

00

96

Tra

ffic

Stu

dy D

ate:

Oct

ober

201

4

Lane

Cou

nt (D

1, D

2) W

orks

heet

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Peak

Hou

r

ADT

Palla

dium

Res

iden

ces

Lane

Wid

th a

nd T

raffi

c D

ata

Driv

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)11

Park

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)9

Side

wal

k W

idth

(ft.)

6

Traf

fic D

ata

Form

at

Exis

ting

Link

Tota

l Num

ber o

f La

nes

In B

oth

Dire

ctio

ns

Cru

ise

Spee

d

Aver

age

Dai

ly T

raffi

c (A

DT)

Park

ing

Lane

Pr

esen

t?Si

dew

alk

Pres

ent?

Lane

Wid

thPa

rkin

g La

ne

Wid

thSi

dew

alk

Wid

th

Argy

le A

venu

e be

twee

n U

S-10

1 N

orth

boun

d O

n-R

amp

and

Hol

lyw

ood

Blv

d4

35

44

96

Argy

le A

venu

e be

twee

n H

olly

woo

d B

lvd

and

Selm

a Av

e3

35

33

96

Argy

le A

venu

e be

twee

n Se

lma

Ave

and

Suns

et B

lvd

23

02

29

6

Bro

nson

Ave

nue

betw

een

Hol

lyw

ood

Blv

d an

d Su

nset

Blv

d3

35

33

96

00

96

.W

/O P

roje

ct

Argy

le A

venu

e be

twee

n U

S-10

1 N

orth

boun

d O

n-R

amp

and

Hol

lyw

ood

Blv

d4

35

44

96

Argy

le A

venu

e be

twee

n H

olly

woo

d B

lvd

and

Selm

a Av

e3

35

33

96

Argy

le A

venu

e be

twee

n Se

lma

Ave

and

Suns

et B

lvd

23

02

29

6

Bro

nson

Ave

nue

betw

een

Hol

lyw

ood

Blv

d an

d Su

nset

Blv

d3

35

33

96

00

00

96

W P

roje

ct

Argy

le A

venu

e be

twee

n U

S-10

1 N

orth

boun

d O

n-R

amp

and

Hol

lyw

ood

Blv

d4

35

44

96

Argy

le A

venu

e be

twee

n H

olly

woo

d B

lvd

and

Selm

a Av

e3

35

33

96

Argy

le A

venu

e be

twee

n Se

lma

Ave

and

Suns

et B

lvd

23

02

29

6

Bro

nson

Ave

nue

betw

een

Hol

lyw

ood

Blv

d an

d Su

nset

Blv

d3

35

33

96

00

00

96

Tra

ffic

Stu

dy D

ate:

Oct

ober

201

4

Lane

Cou

nt (D

1, D

2) W

orks

heet

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Peak

Hou

r

ADT

Palla

dium

Res

iden

ces

Lane

Wid

th a

nd T

raffi

c D

ata

Driv

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)11

Park

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)9

Side

wal

k W

idth

(ft.)

6

Traf

fic D

ata

Form

at

Exis

ting

Link

Tota

l Num

ber o

f La

nes

In B

oth

Dire

ctio

ns

Cru

ise

Spee

d

Aver

age

Dai

ly T

raffi

c (A

DT)

Park

ing

Lane

Pr

esen

t?Si

dew

alk

P res

ent?

Lane

Wid

thPa

rkin

g La

ne

Wid

thSi

dew

alk

Wid

th

El C

entr

o Av

enue

bet

wee

n Se

lma

Ave

and

Suns

et B

lvd

23

02

29

6

El C

entr

o Av

enue

bet

wee

n Su

nset

Blv

d an

d D

e Lo

ngpr

e Av

e2

30

22

96

El C

entr

o Av

enue

n/o

Fou

ntai

n Av

e2

30

22

96

El C

entr

o Av

enue

s/o

Fou

ntai

n Av

e 3

30

33

96

Foun

tain

Ave

nue

betw

een

Vine

St a

nd E

l Cen

tro

Ave

23

02

29

6

.W

/O P

roje

ct

El C

entr

o Av

enue

bet

wee

n Se

lma

Ave

and

Suns

et B

lvd

23

02

29

6

El C

entr

o Av

enue

bet

wee

n Su

nset

Blv

d an

d D

e Lo

ngpr

e Av

e2

30

22

96

El C

entr

o Av

enue

n/o

Fou

ntai

n Av

e2

30

22

96

El C

entr

o Av

enue

s/o

Fou

ntai

n Av

e 3

30

33

96

Foun

tain

Ave

nue

betw

een

Vine

St a

nd E

l Cen

tro

Ave

23

02

29

6

W P

roje

ct

El C

entr

o Av

enue

bet

wee

n Se

lma

Ave

and

Suns

et B

lvd

23

02

29

6

El C

entr

o Av

enue

bet

wee

n Su

nset

Blv

d an

d D

e Lo

ngpr

e Av

e2

30

22

96

El C

entr

o Av

enue

n/o

Fou

ntai

n Av

e2

30

22

96

El C

entr

o Av

enue

s/o

Fou

ntai

n Av

e 3

30

33

96

Foun

tain

Ave

nue

betw

een

Vine

St a

nd E

l Cen

tro

Ave

23

02

29

6

Tra

ffic

Stu

dy D

ate:

Oct

ober

201

4

Lane

Cou

nt (D

1, D

2) W

orks

heet

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Peak

Hou

r

ADT

Palla

dium

Res

iden

ces

Lane

Wid

th a

nd T

raffi

c D

ata

Driv

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)11

Park

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)9

Side

wal

k W

idth

(ft.)

6

Traf

fic D

ata

Form

at

Exis

ting

Link

Tota

l Num

ber o

f La

nes

In B

oth

Di re

ctio

ns

Cru

ise

Spee

d

Aver

age

Dai

ly T

raffi

c (A

DT)

Park

ing

Lane

Pr

esen

t?Si

dew

alk

P res

ent?

Lane

Wid

thPa

rkin

g La

ne

Wid

thSi

dew

alk

Wid

th

Foun

tain

Ave

nue

betw

een

El C

entr

o Av

e an

d G

ower

St

23

02

29

6

Suns

et B

oule

vard

bet

wee

n Vi

ne S

t and

Arg

yle

Ave

64

56

69

6

Suns

et B

oule

vard

bet

wee

n Ar

gyle

Ave

and

El C

entr

o Av

e6

45

66

96

Suns

et B

oule

vard

bet

wee

n El

Cen

tro

Ave

and

Gow

er S

t6

45

66

96

00

96

.W

/O P

roje

ct

Foun

tain

Ave

nue

betw

een

El C

entr

o Av

e an

d G

ower

St

23

02

29

6

Suns

et B

oule

vard

bet

wee

n Vi

ne S

t and

Arg

yle

Ave

64

56

69

6

Suns

et B

oule

vard

bet

wee

n Ar

gyle

Ave

and

El C

entr

o Av

e6

45

66

96

Suns

et B

oule

vard

bet

wee

n El

Cen

tro

Ave

and

Gow

er S

t6

45

66

96

00

00

96

W P

roje

ct

Foun

tain

Ave

nue

betw

een

El C

entr

o Av

e an

d G

ower

St

23

02

29

6

Suns

et B

oule

vard

bet

wee

n Vi

ne S

t and

Arg

yle

Ave

64

56

69

6

Suns

et B

oule

vard

bet

wee

n Ar

gyle

Ave

and

El C

entr

o Av

e6

45

66

96

Suns

et B

oule

vard

bet

wee

n El

Cen

tro

Ave

and

Gow

er S

t6

45

66

96

00

00

96

Tra

ffic

Stu

dy D

ate:

Oct

ober

201

4

Lane

Cou

nt (D

1, D

2) W

orks

heet

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Peak

Hou

r

ADT

Palla

dium

Res

iden

ces

Lane

Wid

th a

nd T

raffi

c D

ata

Driv

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)11

Park

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)9

Side

wal

k W

idth

(ft.)

6

Traf

fic D

ata

Form

at

Exis

ting

Link

Tota

l Num

ber o

f La

nes

In B

oth

Dire

ctio

ns

Cru

ise

Spee

d

Aver

age

Dai

ly T

raffi

c (A

DT)

Park

ing

Lane

Pr

esen

t?Si

dew

alk

P res

ent?

Lane

Wid

thPa

rkin

g La

ne

Wid

thSi

dew

alk

Wid

th

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n C

ahue

nga

Blv

d an

d Vi

ne S

t2

35

22

96

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n Vi

ne S

t and

Arg

yle

Ave

33

53

39

6

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n Ar

gyle

Ave

and

El C

entr

o Av

e2

35

22

96

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n El

Cen

tro

Ave

and

Gow

er S

t2

35

22

96

00

96

.W

/O P

roje

ct

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n C

ahue

nga

Blv

d an

d Vi

ne S

t2

35

22

96

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n Vi

ne S

t and

Arg

yle

Ave

33

53

39

6

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n Ar

gyle

Ave

and

El C

entr

o Av

e2

35

22

96

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n El

Cen

tro

Ave

and

Gow

er S

t2

35

22

96

00

00

96

W P

roje

ct

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n C

ahue

nga

Blv

d an

d Vi

ne S

t2

35

22

96

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n Vi

ne S

t and

Arg

yle

Ave

33

53

39

6

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n Ar

gyle

Ave

and

El C

entr

o Av

e2

35

22

96

Selm

a Av

enue

bet

wee

n El

Cen

tro

Ave

and

Gow

er S

t2

35

22

96

00

00

96

Tra

ffic

Stu

dy D

ate:

Oct

ober

201

4

Lane

Cou

nt (D

1, D

2) W

orks

heet

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Peak

Hou

r

ADT

Palla

dium

Res

iden

ces

Lane

Wid

th a

nd T

raffi

c D

ata

Driv

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)11

Park

ing

Lane

Wid

th (f

t.)9

Side

wal

k W

idth

(ft.)

6

Traf

fic D

ata

Form

at

Exis

ting

Link

Tota

l Num

ber o

f La

nes

In B

oth

Dire

ctio

ns

Cru

ise

Spee

d

Aver

age

Dai

ly T

raffi

c (A

DT)

Park

ing

Lane

Pr

esen

t?Si

dew

alk

Pres

ent?

Lane

Wid

thPa

rkin

g La

ne

Wid

thSi

dew

alk

Wid

th

Fran

klin

Ave

nue

betw

een

Cah

ueng

a B

lvd

and

US-

101

Sout

hbou

nd O

ff-R

amp

44

04

49

6

Fran

klin

e Av

enue

bet

wee

n U

S-10

1 N

orth

boun

d O

n-R

amp

and

Gow

er S

t5

40

55

96

Fran

klin

Ave

nue

e/o

Gow

er S

t5

40

55

96

00

96

00

96

.W

/O P

roje

ct

Fran

klin

Ave

nue

betw

een

Cah

ueng

a B

lvd

and

US-

101

Sout

hbou

nd O

ff-R

amp

44

04

49

6

Fran

klin

e Av

enue

bet

wee

n U

S-10

1 N

orth

boun

d O

n-R

amp

and

Gow

er S

t5

40

55

96

Fran

klin

Ave

nue

e/o

Gow

er S

t5

40

55

96

00

00

96

00

00

96

W P

roje

ct

Fran

klin

Ave

nue

betw

een

Cah

ueng

a B

lvd

and

US-

101

Sout

hbou

nd O

ff-R

amp

44

04

49

6

Fran

klin

e Av

enue

bet

wee

n U

S-10

1 N

orth

boun

d O

n-R

amp

and

Gow

er S

t5

40

55

96

Fran

klin

Ave

nue

e/o

Gow

er S

t5

40

55

96

00

00

96

00

00

96

Tra

ffic

Stu

dy D

ate:

Oct

ober

201

4

Lane

Cou

nt (D

1, D

2) W

orks

heet

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

kPa

rkin

g La

neSi

dew

alk

Park

ing

Lane

Side

wal

k

Peak

Hou

r

ADT

Appendix D: Designated Local Authority Correspondence

D‐1. Palladium Residences: Request to Initiate an Owner Participation Agreement to Allow For a Development Greater Than 4.5:1 in the Hollywood Redevelopment Project Area

LA\4103662.7

355 South Grand Avenue

Los Angeles, California 90071-1560

Tel: +1.213.485.1234 Fax: +1.213.891.8763

www.lw.com

FIRM / AFFILIATE OFFICES

Abu Dhabi Milan

Barcelona Moscow

Beijing Munich

Boston New Jersey

Brussels New York

Century City Orange County

Chicago Paris

Dubai Riyadh

Düsseldorf Rome

Frankfurt San Diego

Hamburg San Francisco

Hong Kong Shanghai

Houston Silicon Valley

London Singapore

Los Angeles Tokyo

Madrid Washington, D.C.

September 10, 2015 CRA/LA, A Designated Local Authority Attn: Mr. Craig Bullock, Special Projects Officer 448 South Hill St., 12th Floor Los Angeles, California 92069

Re: Palladium Residences: Request to Initiate an Owner Participation Agreement to Allow For a Development Greater Than 4.5:1 in the Hollywood Redevelopment Project Area

Dear Mr. Bullock:

On behalf of our client, CH Palladium, LLC (Applicant), this letter is requesting that the CRA/LA, a Designated Local Authority (CRA/LA) and successor to the former Community Redevelopment Agency, proceed with the approval process for the Palladium Residences Project (“Project”), located at 6201 West Sunset Boulevard. We look forward to presenting the Project for CRA/LA’s review.

The Project fulfills important Hollywood Redevelopment Plan objectives, including preservation and enhancement of the Hollywood Palladium (Palladium). The Hearing Examiner for the City of Los Angeles has already held a duly noticed initial public hearing on the Project on April 15, 2015, and indicated its intention to recommend approval to the City Planning Commission (CPC). On August 6, 2015, the Department of City Planning acting as Advisory Agency for the City of Los Angeles approved the Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) for the Project and recommended approval of the entitlements (the August 2015 Action). The CPC will consider those recommendations and appeals, and we will update the CRA/LA in the event of any further Project refinements or conditions that ensue in connection with the CPC’s determination.

THE PALLADIUM RESIDENCES PROJECT

A. Project Description

The Project is a mixed-use development proposed for the underutilized surface parking lots next to the Hollywood Palladium. The Project would protect and enhance the historic Palladium while adding residential and retail uses together with new pedestrian improvements. The Project is a unified development, which as approved in the August 2015 Action, included

CRA/LA September 10, 2015 Page 2

LA\4103662.7

both Option 1 with up to 731 residential units in two high-rise buildings, whose taller elements would reach up to 395 feet in height and up to 30 stories, plus approximately 24,000 square feet of ground floor retail and restaurant space behind the existing Palladium. A second option with the same physical configuration, Option 2, would include up to 250 hotel rooms and 598 residential units, with the same amount of retail. Underground vehicle parking will be provided along with transit-friendly amenities in a location close to both fixed rail and bus transit lines. Parking for approximately 820 bicycles will be provided under both Project options, meeting code requirements for the residential option and exceeding code requirements by 99 under the residential/hotel option. The Project would provide recreational and open space facilities on the Project site, including publicly accessible, landscaped outdoor space in street level courtyards and pedestrian walkways. (See attached site plans and renderings from the Project’s EIR.)

B. Existing Site Conditions, Surrounding Uses, and Neighborhood Character

The Project Site is located in the block bounded by Sunset Boulevard, Argyle Avenue, Selma Avenue, and El Centro Avenue, and it includes the Palladium building in the southeast quadrant of the Site and parking lots in the southwest and northeast quadrants. (See attached aerial of surrounding areas.) The northwest quadrant of the block lies outside of the Project Site and is occupied by a large electronics store and small commercial buildings and surface parking.

The Project vicinity is highly urbanized, with frontage on Sunset Boulevard including a mixed-use blend of commercial uses, restaurants, bars, studio/production uses, office, entertainment, and high-density residential uses in the immediate vicinity. Several other redevelopment projects are proposed or under construction in the vicinity.

C. Unified Redevelopment of Nearly One Square Block in Hollywood

Under the Hollywood Community Plan (Community Plan), the Project Site currently has two different land use designations and zoning classifications. The southern half of the block that fronts Sunset Boulevard is designated Regional Center Commercial and is zoned C4-2D-SN, while the northern half of the block, which fronts Selma Avenue, is designated Commercial Manufacturing and is zoned [Q]C4-1VL. Most of the neighboring properties have already been designated as Regional Center Commercial, and the proposed project would reclassify the northern portion of the block as Regional Center Commercial with [Q]C4-2D-SN zoning, making the land use designation and zoning consistent on the two halves of the block. The Project’s requested zoning would unify the Project Site’s zoning as C4-2D-SN, which would permit an FAR of up to 6:1 with required findings that the Project will preserve the Palladium. The Los Angeles Department of City Planning’s Office of Historic Resources (OHR) has already confirmed to the Historic Resources Group, the consultant which evaluated the Project in relation to the Palladium for the City’s EIR, that the proposed Project with its 6:1 FAR as appropriate in relation to the Palladium.

REQUEST FOR AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT

Under the Hollywood Redevelopment Plan (Plan), the CRA/LA may permit development in excess of 4.5:1 FAR and up to 6:1 FAR when certain prescribed findings are made and an


LA\4103662.7

Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) is executed. The proposed Project readily meets the necessary findings and furthers the Plan’s goals.

Specifically, the Plan provides that a 6:1 FAR may be approved if the proposed Project is consistent with the Plan’s objectives for Regional Center Commercial development and otherwise conforms to the Plan and furthers its purposes of, among other things, rehabilitating historically significant buildings.

Section 506.2.3 of the Plan states that development not to exceed an FAR of 6:1 “may be permitted as hereinafter set forth provided that the proposed development furthers the goals and intent of this Plan and the Community Plan and meets” certain enumerated objectives. As detailed here, the Project readily satisfies the established criteria.

Objective “a”: “[T]o concentrate high intensity and/or density development in areas with reasonable proximity or direct access to high capacity transportation facilities or which effectively utilize transportation demand management program.”

The Project Site is located less than one quarter mile from the Metro Hollywood/Vine Red Line Station and adjacent to numerous Metro regional bus lines and three LADOT Dash lines that serve the Hollywood area. Specifically, as shown on the attached Transit Service Map, the Project Site is served by the Metro Red Line; Metro Lines 180/181, 212/312, 2/302, 217, 222, 210; and Metro Rapid Lines 780 and 4/Rapid 704. Regional transit lines run within two miles of the Project Site, including Metro Rapid Lines 720, 754, and 757, as well as the Hollywood, Hollywood/Wilshire, and Beachwood Canyon LADOT DASH Lines. Together these transit options connect the Project Site with all of Los Angeles County and the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area, as described in detail in the Project’s Transportation Analysis Report (Draft EIR Appendix K-1).

The headway service for local and express routes are between five and 12 minutes during both peak periods. DASH operates with 30-minute headways during the peak hours. The bus services have an estimated seating capacity of approximately 4,940 persons during the peak hours based on a bus seating capacity of 30 persons for a DASH bus, 40 persons for a standard bus, and 65 persons for a Rapid articulated bus. The Metro Red Line, with 10-minute headways in both the AM and PM peak hours has an estimated capacity of over 6,000 persons during the peak periods. With a total estimated seating capacity of approximately 10,950 persons in the peak hours, the proposed Project would utilize up to 0.5% of available transit capacity during the peak hours under the residential option and residential/hotel option.

Consistent with the land uses encouraged for designated “Regional Centers,” pursuant to the Framework Element and the Community Plan, the Project would provide a mix of uses and a development density consistent with the Regional Center designation that would complement other mixed use activities in the Project vicinity. In addition to maintaining the Palladium building as an


LA\4103662.7

entertainment venue, the Project would attract retail uses that provide employment opportunities supporting an estimated 4,000 new construction jobs and 550 new permanent jobs, enhance commercial services in the Hollywood area, and add significant new housing in close proximity to commercial, retail, entertainment, and restaurant uses. The Project could also contribute a large number of hotel units to the area, thus supporting tourism and the economic viability of the entertainment, commercial and tourist activities in the area.

The Project will also implement an aggressive TDM (Transportation Demand Management) program. The TDM program will ensure implementation of the Project’s sidewalks, plazas, street and pedestrian amenities, and lighting and bicycle provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation. The TDM program could feature elements such as unbundled parking that decouples housing costs from parking fees, rideshare programs, or a transit pass discount program.

Objective “b”: “[T]o provide for new development which complements the existing buildings in areas having architecturally and/or historically significant structures or to encourage appropriate development in areas that do not have architecturally and/or historically significant buildings.”

The Project would preserve and enhance the Palladium and provide for its continued use an entertainment and event venue. The Project has been designed to maintain the prominence of the Palladium as an architectural and historic feature on Sunset Boulevard and to frame the building. Key design features helping to preserve the Palladium include setbacks of the Project’s taller structures, which would reach up to 30 stories and up to 395 feet in height, to maintain the historic Palladium façade as a visual focal point for the Project site; views of the main entry on Argyle Avenue have been maintained, framed by new landscaping and decorative features; the architecture of the new buildings would include curvilinear building profiles that complement the Streamline Moderne style of the Palladium Building and marquees; and interpretative displays regarding the Palladium and its history would be provided at key locations outside and/or inside the Palladium.

In addition to the design features, the Project includes a proposed zoning condition that requires the nomination of the Palladium as a Historic-Cultural Monument prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Project. The Project also features implementation of a Palladium Preservation and Enhancement Plan as well as a Historic Interpretive Exhibit for the Palladium. The Palladium Preservation and Enhancement Plan will be reviewed and approved by the OHR and will be in full compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standard for Rehabilitation, as certified by a qualified historic preservation consultant. Many potential elements for inclusion into the Palladium Preservation and Enhancement Plan will be considered, such as improvements to the Palladium’s existing back-stage space, back-of-house service, and loading operations, which do not meet


LA\4103662.7

current performance and production needs; enhanced accessibility to, and utilization of, the Palladium’s existing southern storefront spaces; preparation of a historically compatible signage plan for the Palladium’s existing southern storefront spaces, potentially including such elements as sign dimensions and options for materials, construction, illumination, colors, and finishes; and a number of proposed potential improvements to lobby doors, ceilings, floors, finishing, toilets, chandeliers, exterior walls, and more.

Designation of the Palladium as a City Historic-Cultural Monument will prevent the Applicant from relocating, demolishing, or substantially altering the Palladium without prior approval from the City’s Cultural Heritage Commission. Additionally, to further ensure the preservation of the Palladium, the Applicant has agreed to put in place a preservation easement over the Palladium, which will be held by the Los Angeles Conservancy. A copy of the agreement with Hollywood Heritage regarding the preservation easement can be provided to CRA/LA when it is finalized.

Lastly, as a result of floor area averaging, the density otherwise allotted to the lot on which the Palladium sits will be utilized by the adjacent property with new construction.

The Palladium’s operation will continue during construction. Currently operated by Live Nation, continuing the Palladium as an operating venue is a key project goal. During construction, parking will be secured in nearby lots. Following construction, the existing 317 parking spaces required to be provided on-site will continue to be provided on-site.

Objective “c”: “[T]o provide focal points of entertainment, tourist or pedestrian oriented uses in order to create a quality urban environment.”

The Palladium would provide a destination for tourists to visit and contribute to the historic Hollywood character that attracts visitors to the area. Further, the Project would enhance the quality of the pedestrian environment in the Project vicinity by adding pedestrian-friendly street-level retail and entertainment uses, landscaped and streetscaped courtyards and paths through the Project Site, and new landscaping along the Project site boundaries.

Objective “d”: “[T]o encourage the development of appropriately designed housing to provide a balance in the community.”

The Project would provide up to 731 new dwelling units under Option 1 and up to 598 units under Option 2. The Project would offer potential residents an alternative to single family neighborhoods and low to mid rise apartment projects elsewhere in Hollywood. The Project would provide housing for people that would like to reside near the entertainment, retail, restaurant, and other diverse new uses that the Project would bring to Hollywood.


LA\4103662.7

Objective “e”: “[T]o provide for substantial, well designed, public open space in the Project Area.”

The Project’s ground level would include approximately 33,800 square feet of publicly accessible courtyards and pathways that provide pedestrian connectivity within the surrounding area, provide landscape and streetscape amenities for pedestrians and create a gateway to the Project Site, with an enhanced approach to the Palladium building. The Project would replace an existing, fenced parking lot with three courtyards facing Sunset Boulevard, Argyle Avenue and El Centro Avenue that would open the Site to pedestrians with pedestrian movement through the Project Site. The courtyards and pedestrian paths would include plantings, trees and shaded areas, seating, and a wall planned to accommodate artwork depicting the history of the Palladium.

Section 506.2.3 of the Plan separately includes three findings to permit development up to a 6.:1 FAR. As summarized below, these findings are readily made.

Finding 1: “The proposed development conforms with the provisions and goals of the Redevelopment Plan and any applicable Design(s) for Development or requirements of the Hollywood Boulevard District or Hollywood Core Transition District.”

The Project is consistent with the provisions and goals of the Hollywood Redevelopment Plan, as discussed in the Draft EIR and detailed in its Table 4.H-4, Consistency of the Project with Applicable Sections of the Hollywood Redevelopment Plan, and as discussed in the Final EIR; excerpts of both are attached to this letter. The Project is not in any Design districts and is outside the Hollywood Boulevard District and Hollywood Core Transition District.

Finding 2: “Permitting the proposed development serves a public purpose objective such as: the provision of additional open space, cultural facilities, public parking, or the rehabilitation of an architecturally or historically significant building.”

The Project fulfills multiple public purposes. First, the Project will preserve and enhance the Palladium as a cultural resource, and would allow enhancements including repairs and restoration compatible with its historic features under the Palladium Preservation and Enhancement Plan, which is required under PDF-Hist 1. The Project would develop iconic, landmark buildings that pay homage to the Palladium, with curvilinear building designs and enhanced setbacks that visually frame the Palladium and building heights that are consistent with and add variation to the existing high-rise Hollywood skyline. Further, Project buildings would be designed to maintain the Palladium as the visual focus on Sunset Boulevard through setbacks, and provide a visual buffer and open space between the new Project’s new buildings and the Palladium.

The Project also includes a proposed zoning condition that requires the nomination of the Palladium as a Historic-Cultural Monument prior to the


LA\4103662.7

issuance of a building permit for the Project. The Project also features implementation of a Palladium Preservation and Enhancement Plan as well as a Historic Interpretive Exhibit for the Palladium.

Second, the Project would provide new open space. The Project would replace an existing, fenced parking lot with three courtyards facing Sunset Boulevard, Argyle Avenue and El Centro Avenue that would open the Site to pedestrians with pedestrian movement through the Project Site. The Project would include approximately 33,800 square feet of publicly accessible, ground-level courts and pathways that would provide pedestrian connectivity within the surrounding area, provide landscape and streetscape amenities for pedestrians, and create a gateway to the Project Site, with an enhanced approach to the Palladium building.

Third, parking will be developed consistent with the Code including replacement parking on site for the Palladium. The proposed Project would provide a total of up to 1,993 parking spaces in a subterranean structure as well as above-grade structured parking along the northern edge of the Project Site, which would include the 317 parking spaces currently provided for the Palladium on-site. The number of required spaces under the LAMC depends on whether residential units are developed as condominiums or apartments, but in either case, the Project will exceed the required spaces by each calculation for both Project Options. Treating residential units as condominiums, 1,856 gross total spaces are required for the residential option, and 1,753 gross total spaces are required under the residential/hotel option. Treating residential units as apartments, 1,122 gross total spaces would be required under the residential option, and 1,153 gross total spaces would be required under the residential/hotel option.

Finding 3: “Any adverse environmental effects especially impacts upon the transportation and circulation system of the area caused by proposed development shall be mitigated or are overridden by other social, economic or physical considerations, and statements of findings are made.”

The Project’s EIR analyzed 37 signalized intersections, other unsignalized intersections, and neighborhood street segments, taking into account the cumulative impact of 62 related projects to determine if there would be significant impacts. After mitigation, only three intersections were identified as having a significant and unavoidable impact. If the Project includes a hotel component, there would be significant and unavoidable impacts at four intersections when measured against the existing baseline conditions and five intersections when measured against the future baseline conditions. The EIR also identified a significant impact on one neighborhood street segment when measured against existing baseline conditions, and due to the large number of related projects, a cumulative significant construction traffic impact when considered against future baseline conditions. The EIR identified mitigation measures that would substantially reduce neighborhood street segment impacts as well as construction traffic impacts. The Project’s findings and Statement of Overriding


LA\4103662.7

Considerations are available for review as part of the City of Los Angeles’ administrative record. These conclusions, however, are conservative because the Project’s cumulative impacts included an ambient growth factor of 1 percent in addition to growth from future related projects, even though some of these projects may not be constructed or occupied by Project buildout in 2018, and some may never be built.

The Project’s transit-adjacent location and aggressive TDM Program would reduce potential transportation impacts. Located within walking distance of Metro’s Hollywood/Vine Red Line Station, numerous Metro, Metro Rapid and DASH bus lines, and in the heart of a thriving regional commercial center, the Project’s location offers numerous modes of transport, including on demand transportation services such as Uber, Lyft and, of course, private car. The Project also proposes to reduce residents’ reliance on individual cars further by implementing an aggressive TDM program. The TDM program will ensure implementation of the Project’s sidewalks, plazas, street and pedestrian amenities, and lighting and bicycle provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation. The TDM program could feature elements such as unbundled parking that decouples housing costs from parking fees, rideshare programs, or a transit pass discount program.

The Project will have no impacts on major arterials, such as Santa Monica Boulevard and the 101 Freeway. The Project was conservatively determined to impact only three intersections during peak hours. Nevertheless, the Project, in addition to the TDM program, will implement physical roadway improvements, upgrade traffic signals, and implement a traffic calming plan. During construction, a Construction Management Plan will be implemented that will ensure queuing on City streets is limited and we will work to coordinate construction with nearby construction projects.

In addition, the Project supports Caltrans’ recently adopted Strategic Management Plan. Many aspects of the Project’s transportation design elements, including its location of Project-related jobs and retail, restaurant, and recreational uses near residential and commercial uses and within one quarter mile of transit, and also provision of dedicated bike parking, together encourage pedestrian and non-vehicular mobility. Such measures are encouraged by the new Caltrans Strategic Management Plan, which emphasizes sustainability, livability and economy realized through long-view mobility decisions that avoid urban sprawl, and prioritizes system performance that leverages community partnerships to develop an integrated transportation system. The Project will reduce transportation-related air pollutant and GHG emissions by enforcing truck and equipment construction idling limits, ensuring the use of ultra-low sulfur diesel fuels for all heavy-duty diesel-powered construction equipment, and implementing numerous green building measures that optimize energy performance and help offset the impact of less efficient surrounding uses.

t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

PROJECT SITE PLAN AND RENDERINGS

Proposed Project Envelope

Alternative Project Envelope(Inside Face of Glazing-FAR)

OUTLINE FOR TALLER BUILDING(PROPOSED PROJECT)

OUTLINE FOR TALLER BUILDING(ALTERNATIVE 7)

OUTLINE FOR TALLER BUILDING(PROPOSED PROJECT)

OUTLINE FOR TALLER BUILDING(ALTERNATIVE 7)

FIGUREAlterna ve 7 - Conceptual Site Plan

Palladium Residences 5-5Source: Stanley Saitowitz | Natoma Architects, Inc., 2014.

N

P C R

FIG

UR

EA

lte

rna

ve 7

- C

on

cep

tual

Ro

of-

Top

Te

rrac

e P

lan

Pal

lad

ium

Re

sid

en

ces

5-6

Sou

rce:

Sta

nle

y Sa

ito

wit

z |

Nat

om

a A

rch

itec

ts, I

nc.

, 20

14

.

PC

R

N

Prop

osed

Pro

ject

Alte

rnat

ive

7

T.O

. PA

RA

PE

T +

359’

(PR

OP

OS

ED

PR

OJE

CT

)

+72

' AB

OV

E S

ELM

A(P

RO

PO

SE

D

PR

OJE

CT

)

25’ S

ET

BA

CK

FR

OM

N

OR

TH

FA

CE

OF

P

ALL

AD

IUM

(PR

OP

OS

ED

PR

OJE

CT

)

Sel

ma

Ave

nue

65’ E

NV

ELO

PE

W

IDT

H(P

RO

PO

SE

D

PR

OJE

CT

)

60’ E

NV

ELO

PE

W

IDT

H

ALT

ER

NA

TIV

E 7

22’ A

DD

TL.

SE

TB

AC

KF

RO

M S

ELM

A

ALT

ER

NA

TIV

E 7

PO

DIU

MT.

O. D

EC

K+

105’

AB

OV

E S

ELM

A

T.O

. PA

RA

PE

T +

395’

50’ S

ET

BA

CK

F

RO

M N

OR

TH

FA

CE

OF

PALL

AD

IUM

TO

P O

F A

LTE

RN

AT

IVE

7B

UIL

DIN

G F

AC

ING

EL

CE

NT

RO

AV

EN

UE

FIG

UR

EA

lte

rna

ve 7

- C

om

par

ave

Bu

ildin

g Se

co

ns

Pal

lad

ium

Re

sid

en

ces

5-7

Sou

rce:

Sta

nle

y Sa

ito

wit

z |

Nat

om

a A

rch

itec

ts, I

nc.

, 20

14

.

PC

R

N

t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

INS

PIR

AT

ION

AL

LIV

ING

23

HEIG

HT B

EHIN

D PA

LLAD

IUM

OP

EN S

PACE

BUF

FER

SIGH

T LI

NES

RETA

INED

OFFI

CE O

F HI

STOR

IC R

ESOU

RCES

REC

OMM

ENDE

D AP

PROV

AL O

F PR

OJEC

T DE

SIGN

envi

ronm

enta

l an

alys

is

over

view

of E

IRHI

STOR

IC

INS

PIR

AT

ION

AL

LIV

ING

15

AERIAL

£¤101

Selma Avenue

N El C

entro

Aven

ue

Sunset Boulevard

Argy

le Av

enue

Hollywood Boulevard

Vine S

treet N G

ower

Stree

t

De Longpre Avenue

Yucca StreetIva

r Ave

nue

HollywoodPalladium

CapitalRecords

PantagesTheatre

W. Hoteland

Residences

Mixed Use Residential and

Commercial

Sunset & Vine Mixed Use

Commercial and

Residential

Low/Medium Density Residential

Sunset & Vine Tower

CBSColumbia

Square

NickelodeonStudio

Low/Medium Density

Residential

Commercial

Sunset Gower Studios

Arclight Cinemas/Cinerama Dome

Sunset Media Tower

Office and Commercial

HollywoodCommunity

Hospital

Low/Medium Density

Residential

Residential and Commercial

LA Fitness

Selma Avenue

Harold Way

La B

aig Av

enue

CommercialLA FilmSchool

Columbia Square(under

construction)

BLVD 6200(under

construction)

Commercial

Commercial ParkingStructure

Selma and Vine Mixed Use

(under construction)

FIGURE

Source: ESRI, 2010; PCR Services Corporation, 2014.

0 400 800 Feet


Project Site andSurrounding Land Useso 4.H-1

Project Boundary

Selma Avenue Area

Sunset Boulevard Area

t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

TRANSIT SERVICE

Vin

e S

t

Sunset Blvd

Wilco

x A

v

Hollywood Blvd

Go

wer

St

Santa Monica Blvd

Co

le A

v

El C

entr

o A

v

Cah

uen

ga B

lvd

Ivar

Av

De Longpre Av

Bro

nso

n A

v

Go

rdo

n S

t

Arg

yle A

v

Tam

ari

nd

Av

Lod

i P

l L

Afton Pl

Carlton Wy

Carlos Av

Co

le P

l

F

Mo

rnin

gsi

de C

t

Leland Wy

Gra

ce A

v

Co

smo

St

Banner Av

Lab

aig

Av

Beach

wo

od

Dr

Selma Av

Hu

dso

n A

v

Vis

Del M

ar

Av

Yucca St

Go

rdo

n S

tFountain Av

Yucca St

Carlos Av

Hu

dso

n A

v

Selma Av

Av

Franklin Av

Lexington Av

£¤101

METRORED LINE

M780

M217

DASHBeachwood Canyon

DASHHollywood/Wilshire

DASHBeachwood Canyon

DASHHollywood

M210

M2/302

M217

M222

M4/704

DASHHollywood/Wilshire

ProjectSite

M210

M210

M180/181

M212/312

EXISTING TRANSIT LINES SERVING THE PROJECT AREAFIGURE 3

N:\Jobs\Active\2500s\2554 - 8555 SM Blvd Traffic Study\Graphics\GIS\MXD

Not to Scale

NNNNN

t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

DRAFT AND FINAL EIR HOLLYWOOD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINDINGS

October 2014 4.H. Land Use and Planning

CityofLosAngeles PalladiumResidencesSCH#2013081022 4.H‐49

Table 4.H‐4

Consistency of the Project with Applicable Sections of the Hollywood Redevelopment Plan

Plan Provision Analysis of Project Consistency

Section300.RedevelopmentPlanGoals1)Encouragetheinvolvementandparticipationof

residents,businesspersons,propertyowners,andcommunityorganizationsintheredevelopmentofthecommunity.

Consistent: TheProjectwouldprovidedevelopmentpursuanttotheRedevelopmentAgency’smandatetoendblightbycreatingnewdevelopmentonunderutilizedparkinglotswithhousing,retail,entertainment,andinthecaseofOption2,hoteluses.ThedevelopmentwouldbeanewprojectaddingvibrancytotheHollywoodCenter,withimprovedpedestrianfacilitiesandlandscapedgroundlevelopenspace.TheProjectalsorepresentsaprivatesectordevelopmentsubjecttopublicreviewunderCEQA.TheProjecthasbeenpresentedtostakeholdersforcommentandpresentedatapublicEIRscopingmeeting.PursuanttoCEQA,theProject’simpactsarebeinganalyzedinanEIRthatwillbecirculatedtointerestedpartiesforcomment,andcommentswillberespondedtoinaFinalEIR.TheProjectwillalsobesubjecttoapublichearingprocess.

2)Preserveandincreaseemployment,andbusinessandinvestmentopportunitiesthroughredevelopmentprogramsand,tothegreatestextentfeasible,promotetheseopportunitiesforminoritiesandwomen.

Consistent: ThisGoalpertainstotheapplicationofredevelopmentprogramsandisadirectivetotheCRA.However,thisprivateProjectwouldaddemploymentopportunitiestothecommunityandwouldcompriseaconsiderableinvestmentinthecommunitythatwouldoccurwithoutCRAprograminvolvement,thussupportingtheultimateintentoftheGoal.

3)Promoteabalancedcommunitymeetingtheneedsoftheresidential,commercial,industrial,artsandentertainmentsectors.

Consistent: This GoaladdressesdevelopmentovertheentireRedevelopmentAreaandisnotfullyapplicabletooneproject.However,thisProjectwouldprovideaconsiderableamountofhousingdevelopment,newcommercialusesandwouldprovideforthecontinueduseofthePalladiumasanentertainmentandeventvenue.TheProjectwouldprovideamixofuseswithintheSiteandwouldcontributetotheoverallcommunitymixanticipatedinthePlanasdiscussedfurther,aboveandbelow.

5)Improvethequalityoftheenvironment,promoteapositiveimageforHollywoodandprovideasafeenvironmentthroughmechanismssuchas:

a. adoptinglandusestandards;b. promotingarchitecturalandurbandesign

standardsincluding:standardsforheight,buildingsetback,continuityofstreetfaçade,buildingmaterials,andcompatibilityofnewconstructionwithexistingstructuresandconcealmentofmechanicalappurtenances;

c. promotinglandscapecriteriaandplantingprogramstoensureadditionalgreenpace;

d. encouragingmaintenanceofthebuiltenvironment;

e. promotingsignandbillboardstandards;

Consistent: ThisGoalpertainstotheapplicationofredevelopmentprogramsandisadirectivetotheCRA.However,thisprivateProjectwouldreplaceavacant,underutilizedparkinglotwithanewdevelopmentthatwouldprovideforthecontinuedoperationofahistoric,cultural,entertainmentresourceaswellasprovidenewdevelopmentthatisconsistentwithtypeandscaleofdevelopmentintheplanareaandapplicabledesignstandards.WhiletheRedevelopmentPlanitselfonlyrecommendsthecreationofdesignstandards,theCityhasproceededwiththedevelopmentofdesignguidelinessuchastheWalkabilityChecklistandtheCitywideandCD13DesignGuidelines,whichsupportsiteplanreviewandcontributetocommunityplanupdatesthroughouttheCity.ProjectconsistencywiththeWalkabilityGuidelines

4.H. Land Use and Planning October 2014

Table 4.H‐4 (Continued)

Consistency of the Project with Applicable Sections

of the Hollywood Redevelopment Plan



f. coordinatingtheprovisionofhighqualitypublicimprovements;

g. promotingrehabilitationandrestorationguidelines;

h. integratepublicsafetyconcernsintoplanningefforts.

isdiscussedbelow.TheProject’sconsistencywiththeurbandesignguidelinesisaddressedinSection4.A,Aesthetic/VisualResourcesofthisDraftEIR.Asdiscussedtherein,theProjectwouldbeconsistentwiththeguidanceofthisGoal.

6)SupportandpromoteHollywoodasthecenteroftheentertainmentindustryandatouristdestinationthroughtheretention,developmentandexpansionofallsectorsoftheentertainmentindustryandthepreservationoflandmarksrelatedtotheentertainmentindustry.

Consistent: PreservationofthePalladiumasanon‐goingentertainmentandevents(e.g.meetingspace)venuewouldsupportthefacilitiesandattractionsavailabletotouristsandCityresidents;andwouldcontributetothecharacterofHollywoodthatservesasatouristandvisitorattraction.UnderOption2,Residential/Hotel,theProjectwouldincludeupto250hotelrooms,alongwithsupportfacilitiestoaccommodatecertainvisitors,suchasmeetingrooms,toservetouriststothearea.

9)Providehousingchoicesandincreasethesupplyandimprovethequalityofhousingforallincomeandagegroups,especiallyforpersonswithlowandmoderateincomes;andtoprovidehomeownershipopportunitiesandotherhousingchoiceswhichmeettheneedsoftheresidentpopulation.

Consistent: TheProjectwouldnotablyincreasethehousingsupplyintheHollywoodcommunity,providingunitsforpopulationthatseekresidencywithinactivitycentersandthatseekhousinginproximitytothetypesofemploymentandentertainmentvenuesthatareprovidedwithinHollywood.Itwouldprovideupto731residentialunitsunderOption1andupto598unitsunderOption2.Thesehousingunitswouldbeplacedonavacantparkinglotasinfilldevelopmentwithinadevelopedarea.Therefore,theProjectwouldnotrequiredemolitionofexistinghousingstockservingvariedincomelevelsoradverselyaffecttheavailabilityofsingle‐family,lowdensityapartmenthousingopportunities.Thatis,itwouldaddtotherangeofhousingopportunitiesavailableovertheHollywoodarea,andprovideatypeof“housingmilieu”thatisnotreadilyavailableatotherlocationsintheCity.Theunitswouldrangefromstudiotothreebedroomsinsize,withalargemajorityoftheunitsbeingstudioandone‐bedroom.Thisvarietyinsizewouldprimarilyaccommodatehousingforsingles,couplesandworkingprofessionals,whilesomeunitscouldaccommodatesmallfamilies.

10)Promotethedevelopmentofsoundresidentialneighborhoodsthroughmechanismssuchaslanduse,densityanddesignstandards,publicimprovements,propertyrehabilitation,sensitivein‐fillhousing,trafficandcirculationprogramming,developmentofopenspacesandothersupportservicesnecessarytoenableresidentstoliveandworkinHollywood.

Consistent: TheProjectwouldprovideaconsiderableamountofnewresidentialdevelopmentonaninfillsite,makinguseofavailableFARincentivesandwithoutintrudingonnearbyresidentialneighborhoods.AsindicatedintheTransportation,UtilityandServiceSections,ofthisDraftEIR,Section4.L,Section4.MandSection4.K,respectively,theProjectwouldhavesufficientinfrastructuretomeetitsneeds.TheProjectincludesgroundlevelopenspacethatwouldprovidepublicpedestrianandopenspaceamenities.ForfurtherdiscussionrefertoSection4.K.5,ParksandRecreation.







11)Recognize,promoteandsupporttheretention,restorationandappropriatereuseofexistingbuildings,groupingsofbuildingsandotherphysicalfeaturesespeciallythosehavingsignificanthistoricand/orarchitecturalvalueandensurethatnewdevelopmentissensitivetothesefeaturesthroughlanduseanddevelopmentcriteria.

Consistent.TheProjectwouldretainthePalladiumasahistoricresourceandarchitecturalfocusofSitedevelopment.TheProjectwouldbedesignedtocreatevisualinterestthroughvariationsinbuildingheight,architecture,landscaping,anddesign.EnhancementofthePalladiumwouldconformtotheSecretaryoftheInteriorStandards.TheenhancementprogramwouldsupportthePalladium’scontinuedcontributiontotheculturalframeworkofthearea.Keyimprovementscouldincludeenhancementstothehistoricmainlobbytomatchorenhancethecharacteroftheoriginalbuildingdesign,replacementofdoorsunderthemarquee,andimprovementstotheballroom.Inaddition,extensivelandscaping,openspace,andpedestrianlinkswouldbeintroducedtoconnectandintegrateallelementsoftheProject.

12)SupportandencourageacirculationsystemwhichwillimprovethequalityoflifeinHollywood,includingpedestrian,automobile,parkingandmasstransitsystemswithanemphasisonservingexistingfacilitiesandmeetingfutureneeds.

Consistent:TheProjectwouldincreasepopulationdensityinproximitytotheMetroredlinestation,otherregionalMetrobuslines,andtheLADOTDashlinesthatprovidepublictransitthroughoutthecoreoftheHollywoodarea.Further,theProjectwouldincludebicyclefacilitiesforProjectresidents,employeesandvisitors.TheProjectwouldprovide,asmitigation,physicalimprovementsattwointersections,signalizationimprovementstoenhancetrafficflowsatsevenintersections,implementationofatraveldemandmanagementprogramandtrafficcalmingmeasuresalongonestretchofroadway.

14)Promoteandencouragedevelopmentofrecreationalandculturalfacilitiesandopenspacesnecessarytosupportattractiveresidentialneighborhoodsandcommercialcenters.

Consistent.ThePalladiumwouldcontinuetooperateasaneventandentertainmentvenue,maintainingtheexistingfacilitiesandretainingthebuilding’sdefiningexteriorarchitecturalfeatures.TheProjectwouldalsoproviderecreationalandopenspaceusesontheProjectSite.TheProjectwouldimprovepedestrianfacilitiesandopenspaceontheProjectSitewiththeprovisionofthelandscapedcourtyardsandstreetscapeamenities.AlsotheProjectwouldprovideactiverecreationalfacilities,includinggym,spafacilities,privatebalconies,andlandscapedroofandpoolterracestohelpmeettheneedsofresidentsandreduceparkandrecreationalimpacts.

Section500.LandUsesPermittedintheProjectAreaSection502.MapTheRedevelopmentPlanMap,"ExhibitA.1,"…showsthelocationoftheProjectAreaboundaries,theimmediatelyadjacentstreets,thepublicrights‐of‐way,theproposedlandusestobepermittedintheProjectAreaforallpublic,semipublicandprivatelandanddesignateddistrictsofspecialimport.

Consistent: ExhibitA.1, theRedevelopmentPlanMap,designatedparcelswithinthePlanareaforproposedlanduses,anddesignatedtheProjectSitefor“CommercialManufacturing”onthenorthern,SelmaAvenueAreaandas“RegionalCommercial”onthesouthern,SunsetBoulevardArea.Thesedesignationsareconsistentwiththedesignationsinthe1988HollywoodCommunityPlan.







NotwithstandinganythingtothecontraryinthisPlan,thelandusespermittedintheProjectAreashallbethosepermittedbytheGeneralPlan,theapplicableCommunityPlan,andanyapplicableCityzoningordinance,allastheynowexistorarehereafteramendedand/orsupplementedfromtimetotime.Theinitiationofanyproposedamendmentand/orsupplementtotheGeneralPlan,applicableCommunityPlan,and/oranyapplicableCityzoningordinanceshallbecoordinatedbetweentheDepartmentofCityPlanningandtheAgency.

IntheeventtheGeneralPlan,theapplicableCommunityPlan,and/oranyapplicableCityzoningordinanceisamendedand/orsupplementedwithregardtoanylanduseintheProjectArea,thelanduseprovisionsofthisPlan,including,withoutlimitation,allExhibitsattachedhereto,shallbeautomaticallymodifiedaccordinglywithouttheneedforanyformalplanamendmentprocess.

Atsuchtime,theAgencyshallbeauthorizedtoreplaceanyExhibitsheretowithmodifiedExhibitsinordertoconformtosuchamendedorsupplementedGeneralPlan,applicableCommunityPlan,orapplicableCityzoningordinance.

TheremainingportionofSection502,discussesproceduresbywhichthePlanmapmightbeadjusted,andindicatesthatitistheintentoftheRedevelopmentPlantostaycurrentwith,andbemodifiedtoreflectchangesintheHollywoodCommunityPlan.

TheProject’sproposedGeneralPlanandzoningamendmentswould,byvirtueofSection502,becomeapplicabletotheHollywoodRedevelopmentPlanaswell,andtherewouldbeconsistencyamongstplans.Asindicatedinthediscussionregardingthe1988HollywoodCommunityPlan,above,suchachangeindesignationwouldbefullyconsistentwiththeintentofboththe1988HollywoodCommunityPlanandtheprovisionsofSection506.2.3ofthisPlanaswell.

506.2.3RegionalCenterCommercialDensityDevelopmentwithintheRegionalCenterCommercialdesignationshallnotexceedtheequivalentofanaveragefloorarearatio(F.A.R.)of4.5:1fortheentireareasodesignated.

ItistheintentofthisPlan,however,tofocusdevelopmentwithintheRegionalCenterCommercialdesignation,ashereinaftersetforth,inordertoprovideforeconomicdevelopmentandguidanceintheorderlydevelopmentofahighqualitycommercial,recreationalandresidentialurbanenvironmentwithanemphasisonentertainmentorienteduses.Therefore,developmentwithintheRegionalCenterCommercialdesignationshallbefocusedonareasservedbyadequatetransportationfacilitiesandtransportationdemandmanagementprograms.Furtheritshallreinforcethehistoricaldevelopmentpatternsofthearea,stimulateappropriateresidentialhousingandprovidetransitionscompatiblewithadjacentlowerdensityresidentialneighborhoods.

Proposeddevelopmentinexcessof4.5:1F.A.R.uptobutnottoexceed6:1F.A.R.orsuchotherdensitymaybepermittedbyfutureamendmentstotheCommunityPlan,onaspecificsitemaybepermittedashereinaftersetforthprovidedthattheproposeddevelopmentfurthersthe

Consistent:TheProjectisproposingadevelopmentthatwouldbebuilttoanFARof6.0:1,andassuchwouldbesubjecttoreviewunderthecriteriaestablishedforincreasesfromthebaselineFARof4.5:1.AsindicatedthestandardisthataProjectmeetatleastthecriteriaestablishedin“objectivea)”andoneadditionalobjectiveofitems“b”through“f.”OfthesixobjectiveslistedtheProjectwouldmeetthecriteriaestablishedinthefirstfive,withthelastnotapplicabletotheProject,asfollows:

a) TheProjectwouldbeconsistentwiththelandusesencouragedfordesignated“RegionalCenters,”pursuanttotheFrameworkElementandtheHollywoodCommunityPlan(both1988and2012versions).ItwouldprovideamixofusesandadevelopmentdensitythatisconsistentwiththatdesignationandcomplementothermixeduseactivitiesintheProjectvicinity.ItwouldprovideamixofusesincludingcontinuedoperationsofthePalladiumbuildingasanon‐goingentertainmentvenue,retailusesthatprovideemploymentopportunitiesandenhancecommercialservicesintheHollywoodarea,andalargenumberofnewhousingunitswithinthearea.TheprovisionofresidentialunitsatthisHollywoodlocationwouldprovidehousingincloseproximitytocommercial,







goalsandintentofthisPlanandtheCommunityPlanandmeetsobjective“a”andatleastoneotherofthefollowingobjectives:

a)toconcentratehighintensityand/ordensitydevelopmentinareaswithreasonableproximityordirectaccesstohighcapacitytransportationfacilitiesorwhicheffectivelyutilizetransportationdemandmanagementprograms;

retail,entertainment,andrestaurantuses.UnderOption2,theProjectwouldalsocontributealargenumberofhotelunitstothearea,thussupportingtourismandtheeconomicviabilityoftheentertainment,commercialandtouristactivitiesinthearea.ItwouldprovidethisdevelopmentlessthanonequartermilefromtheMetroredlinestationandadjacenttonumerousMetroregionalbuslinesandthreeLADOTDashlinesthatservethedowntownHollywoodarea.

b)toprovidefornewdevelopmentwhichcompliments[sic]theexistingbuildingsinareashavingarchitecturallyand/orhistoricallysignificantstructuresortoencourageappropriatedevelopmentinareasthatdonothavearchitecturallyand/orhistoricallysignificantbuildings.

b) TheProjectwouldpreserveandenhancetheHollywoodPalladiumandprovideforitscontinueduseanentertainmentandeventvenue.TheProjecthasbeendesignedtomaintaintheprominenceofthePalladiumasanarchitecturalandhistoricfeatureonSunsetBoulevardandtoframethebuilding.Keydesignfeaturesthatcontributetomeetingthisstandardinclude:1)preservationandenhancementofthePalladiumbuilding;2)theproposedbuildingadjacenttothePalladiumonSunsetBoulevardislowerinheightthanthePalladiumandsetbackfartherfromSunsetBoulevardthanthePalladium;3)viewsofthemainentryonArgyleAvenuehavebeenmaintained,framedbynewlandscapinganddecorativefeatures,suchasfountains;4)thearchitectureofthenewbuildingswouldincludecurvilinearbuildingprofilesthatcomplementtheStreamlineModernestyleofthePalladiumBuildingandmarquees;5)thenewbuildingshavelargesetbacksfromthePalladium;and6)interpretativedisplaysregardingthePalladiumanditshistorywouldbeprovidedatkeylocationsoutsideand/orinsidethePalladium.

c)toprovidefocalpointsofentertainment,touristorpedestrianorientedusesinordertocreateaqualityurbanenvironment;and

c) ThePalladiumwouldprovideadestinationfortouriststovisitandcontributetothehistoricHollywoodcharacterthatattractsvisitorstothearea.Further,theProjectwouldenhancethequalityofthepedestrianenvironmentintheProjectvicinitybyaddingpedestrianfriendly,streetlevelretailandentertainmentuses,addinglandscapedandstreetscapedcourtyardsandpathsthroughtheProjectSite,andaddingnewlandscapingattheProjectedges.







d)toencouragethedevelopmentofappropriatelydesignedhousingtoprovideabalanceinthecommunity.

d) TheProjectwouldprovideupto731newdwellingunitsunderOption1andupto598unitsunderOption2.TheunitswouldbeprovidedinadistinctivestructurethatcomplementsthePalladium.TheProjectwouldprovideahighdensitycomplexwithinanactivitycenter.ThisdevelopmentwouldvaryfromandofferanalternativeoptiontothesinglefamilyneighborhoodsandlowtomidriseapartmentprojectsthatarepredominantinHollywood.TheProjectwouldprovidehousingforpeopledthatwouldliketoresideamongtheentertainment,andserviceactivitiesprovidedintheHollywoodCenter.

e)toprovideforsubstantial,welldesigned,publicopenspaceintheProjectArea.

e) TheProject’sgroundlevelwouldincludeapproximately33,800squarefeetofpubliclyaccessiblecourtyardsandpathwaysthatprovidepedestrianconnectivitywithinthesurroundingarea,providelandscapeandstreetscapeamenitiesforpedestriansandcreateagatewaytotheProjectSite,withanenhancedapproachtotheHollywoodPalladiumbuilding.TheProjectwouldreplaceanexisting,fencedparkinglotwiththreecourtyardsfacingSunsetBoulevard,ArgyleAvenueandElCentroAvenuethatwouldopentheSitetopedestrianswithpedestrianmovementthroughtheProjectSite.Thecourtyardsandpedestrianpathswouldincludesuchfeaturesasacentralreflectingpoolandplantedarea,seating,acanopyoftrees,withasmallfountainatthestreet,andawallplannedtoaccommodateartworkdepictingthehistoryofthePalladium.

f)toprovidesocialservicesorfacilitiesforsocialserviceswhichaddressthecommunity’sneeds.a

f) N/A

516.SignsandBillboardsAllsignsmustconformtoCitysignandbillboardstandardsastheynowexistorarehereafterlegislated.Itisrecognizedthatthecoordinationofsignsandbillboardswithintheprojectareaaffectitsappearanceandimage.Therefore,itistheintentofthisPlanthattheAgencymay,afterpublichearing,adoptadditionalsignandbillboardstandardsforaportionofortheentireProjectAreawhichmaybemorerestrictivethanCitystandardsinordertofurtherthegoalsofthisPlanortheobjectivesofaspecialdistrictasestablishedbythisPlan.

Consistent.AllsignagewouldbeconsistentwiththeprovisionsoftheHollywoodSignageSupplementUseDistrict.TheexistingPalladiumsignsandmarqueeswouldberetainedasiconiclandmarksandmajorfeaturesoftheProject.Newsignagewouldincludebuildingidentification,wayfinding,andsecuritymarkings.CommercialsignageforthegroundlevelretailwouldbesimilartootherexistingstreetfrontcommercialsignageintheProjectareaandnewaccentlightingwouldcomplementbuildingarchitecture.Pole‐mountedlightfixtureslocatedon‐siteorwithintheadjacentpublicrights‐of‐waywouldbeshieldedanddirectedtowardstheareastobelitandawayfromadjacentsensitiveuses.







5.17.Utilities.TheAgencymayrequirethatallutilitiesbeplacedundergroundwheneverphysicallyandeconomicallyfeasibleasdeterminedbytheAgency.

Consistent.UtilitieswithintheProjectSitewouldbeprovidedunderground.

519.SetbacksParkingfornewdevelopmentsshallnotbepermittedintherequiredresidentialfrontyards.Setbackareasnotusedforaccess,or,whenpermittedparking,shallbelandscapedandmaintainedbytheownerunlessotherwisespecifiedinaParticipationorDevelopmentAgreement.TheAgencymayadoptDesign(s)forDevelopmentwhichestablishsetbackandlandscaperequirementsfornewdevelopmentswithintheProjectArea.

Consistent.TheProject’ssetbackareaswouldbelandscapedforaestheticappearanceandsupportofpedestrianmovements.Projectparkingwouldbeprovidedinsubterraneanandabovegroundstructures.Noparkingwouldbeprovidedinresidentialfrontyards.

a Section 506.2.3 provides additional guidance regarding the process by which in increase in FAR to 6.0:1 would occur subject to review

per the standards sited above.

Source:PCRServicesCorporation,2014

Agreement executed by the CRA Board; and approval by the Planning Commission, or City Council onAppeal.17

Development of the Project as proposed would require a zone change and general plan amendment todesignatebothlotsasRegionalCenterCommercialwithC4zoningpermittingresidentialandhotelusesatheightdistrict“2”,similartotheupdatesapprovedunderthe2012HollywoodCommunityPlan.Withsuchapprovals,theProjectwouldbeconsistentwiththeSite’szoning.

TheproposedchangesinlandusedesignationwouldunifythezoningandGeneralPlandesignationsacrosstheProjectSite,correctanirregularlotdesignationatvariancefromlandusedesignationsonsurroundingproperties,andwouldbettersupportthe1988HollywoodCommunityPlanpoliciesfordevelopmentoftheHollywoodCenterthandothecurrentdesignations. Therefore,suchachangeinzoningdesignationwouldnotbeconsideredtohaveanadverseeffectonthelanduserelationshipsintheProjectvicinity;andsuchazone change would be consistent with the applicable plans. The Project would be consistent with thepermitteduses,heightsandFARandsetbacksassociatedwiththeproposedzoning.

17 As discussed under the regulatory discussion regarding the Hollywood Redevelopment Project/Plan, responsibilities formerly

assignedtotheCommunityRedevelopmentAgencyarecurrentlybeingtransferredtotheCityofLosAngeles.

2.0 Corrections and Additions March 2015


Onenewbullet/approvalhasbeenaddedtothelistasfollows:

AfindingofProjectConsistencywith theHollywoodRedevelopmentPlanaswellasanynecessaryconsiderationbytheauthorizedsuccessoragencytotheCommunityRedevelopmentAgency;

2. Volume I, Page 4.H‐22. The last paragraph on the page is revised to read as follows:

Construction activitieswould largely be confined to the Project Site. Occasional lLane closures for utilityhook‐ups, truck queuing at adjacent curbsides and/or construction activities would be limited to theconstructionphase,short‐termandconsistentwith thepracticesofconstructionprogramsthroughout theregion.WiththeimplementationofregulatorymeasuresandSitesecurity/screening,constructionactivitieswouldnotprecludenearbyusesfromcarryingtheirdailyactivitiesnoralternearbylanduserelationships.Therefore,constructionimpactsonlandusewouldbelessthansignificant.

3. Volume 1, page 4.H‐48. A new paragraph is added after the first full paragraph on this page as

follows:

Section 506.2.3 also includes three findings or determinations for future amendments to the CommunityPlan to permit development that exceeds an FAR of 4.5:1 up to a 6.0:1 FAR. The threefindings/determinationsareasfollows:

1. TheproposeddevelopmentconformswiththeprovisionsandgoalsoftheRedevelopmentPlanandanyapplicable Design(s) for Development or requirements of the Hollywood Boulevard District orHollywoodCoreTransitionDistrict.

AsdiscussedinthepreviousparagraphsandTable4.H‐4onpage4.H‐49oftheDraftEIR,theProjectisconsistentwiththeprovisionsandgoalsoftheHollywoodRedevelopmentPlan.TheProjectdoesnot lie within the boundaries of Design for Development and it lies outside of the HollywoodBoulevardDistrictandHollywoodCoreTransitionDistrict.

2. Permitting the proposed development serves a public purpose objective such as: the provision ofadditionalopenspace,cultural facilities,publicparking,or therehabilitationofanarchitecturallyorhistoricallysignificantbuilding.

As discussed throughout the Draft EIR, the Project includes the public purpose objective ofpreservingandenhancingtheHollywoodPalladium.TheProject’sfirstobjective,listedonpage2‐9of the Draft EIR, is to “Protect the Hollywood Palladium as a cultural resource, and allowenhancementsincludingrepairsandrestorationcompatiblewithhistoricfeaturesofthePalladium.”ThesecondandthirdProjectobjectivesalsoemphasizetheimportanceofhighlightingthePalladiumthroughtheProject’sdesign:“Developiconic,landmarkbuildingsthatpayshomagetotheHollywoodPalladium, with building designs that visually frame the Palladium and building heights that areconsistent with and add variation to the existing high‐rise Hollywood skyline;” and “Design theProject’s buildings to maintain the Palladium as the visual focus on Sunset Boulevard throughsetbacks,andprovideavisualbufferandopenspacebetweenthenewProject’snewbuildingsandthePalladium.”

March 2015 2.0 Corrections and Additions


TheProjectalso includesaproposedzoningcondition that requires theApplicant tonominate thePalladiumasaHistoric‐CulturalMonumentinaccordancewiththeCity’sCulturalHeritageOrdinancepriortotheissuanceofabuildingpermitfortheProject.Finally,theProjectproposestoimplementaPalladium Preservation and Enhancement Plan as described in PDF‐HIST‐1 and a HistoricInterpretiveExhibitforthePalladiumasdescribedinPDF‐HIST‐2.

3. Anyadverseenvironmentaleffectsespeciallyimpactsuponthetransportationandcirculationsystemoftheareacausedbyproposeddevelopmentshallbemitigatedorareoverriddenbyothersocial,economicorphysicalconsiderations,andstatementsoffindingsaremade.

TheDraftEIRhasevaluatedtheProject’simpactsonthetransportationandcirculationsystem.Aftermitigation,underOption1therewouldbesignificantandunavoidableimpactsatthreeintersectionswhen measured against both the existing and future baseline conditions. Under Option 2, therewould be significant and unavoidable impacts at four intersections when measured against theexisting baseline conditions and five intersections when measured against the future baselineconditions.

Theanalysisalsoidentifiedasignificantimpactononeneighborhoodstreetsegmentwhenmeasuredagainstexistingbaseline conditions, anddue to the largenumberof relatedprojects, a cumulativesignificantconstructiontrafficimpactwhenconsideredagainstfuturebaselineconditions.TheDraftEIR identified mitigation measures that would substantially reduce neighborhood street segmentimpacts as well as construction traffic impacts, but these impacts would remain significant andunavoidable.

TheDraftEIRalsoevaluatedProject impactsof21additionalenvironmentaltopicsconsistentwiththe CEQA Guidelines. The analysis identified potentially significant and unavoidable impactsregarding air quality and noise during construction. Even with the implementation of therecommendedmitigationmeasures, the Projectwould, on a temporary basis, exceed the SCAQMDregionalsignificancethresholdsforNOx,duringaonetotwodayperiodwhenacontinuousconcretepouring would be performed. Further, even though noise barriers would be constructed asmitigationtoreduceconstructionnoiselevels,attimesofmaximumconstructionactivitynoiselevelsmayexceedthesignificancethresholds.

Thus, the EIR has fully analyzed the Project’s potentially significant impacts, identified feasiblemitigation measures, and identified certain areas where impacts would remain significant andunavoidable.ProjectapprovalwouldrequireFindingsandaStatementofOverridingConsiderationspursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, which would satisfy the requirements of thisHollywoodRedevelopmentPlanprovisionaswell.

t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

D‐2. Letter from CRA/LA Regarding Floor Area Ratio ‐ Regional Center Commercial Designation Hollywood Redevelopment Project Area.

t.keelan

Intentionally Blank

errata 1 palladium residences project final environmental impact … · 2015-11-06 · b. project...

Documents