0. exec summary - la city planning · executive summary november 2014 city of los angeles 8150...

CityofLosAngeles 8150SunsetBoulevardMixedUseProjectSCHNo.2013091044 ES‐1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ThischapteroftheDraftEnvironmentalImpactReport(“DraftEIR”)ispreparedpursuanttotheCaliforniaEnvironmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) for the proposed 8150 Sunset Boulevard Mixed‐Use Project (the“Project”). InaccordancewithCEQAGuidelinesSection15123,thischapterprovidesabriefdescriptionoftheProject;identifiessignificanteffectsandproposedmitigationmeasuresoralternativesthatwouldreduceoravoidthoseeffects;describesareasofcontroversyknowntothe leadagency;andpresents issuestoberesolved.

A. PROJECT LOCATION

The Project Site is located at 8150W. Sunset Boulevard in the Hollywood community of the City of LosAngeles,atthefootoftheHollywoodHills,approximatelysevenmilesnorthwestofDowntownLosAngeles.The site is well served by a network of regional transportation facilities. Various public transit stopsoperated by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) are located in closeproximitytotheProjectSite,theHollywoodFreeway(StateRoute101)isapproximatelytwomilesnortheastof the site, Interstate 10 is approximately four miles south of the Project Site, and Interstate 405 isapproximatelysixmilessouthwestofthesite.

B. PROPOSED PROJECT

The Project Site is located at 8150W. Sunset Boulevard in the Hollywood community of the City of LosAngeles,atthefootoftheHollywoodHills,approximatelysevenmilesnorthwestofDowntownLosAngeles.TheProjectSiteislocatedwithintheblockboundedbySunsetBoulevardonthenorth,HavenhurstDriveonthewest,CrescentHeightsBoulevardontheeast,andmulti‐familyresidentialuseswithintheCityofWestHollywoodonthesouth.TheProjectSiteislocatedinthewesternportionoftheHollywoodCommunityoftheCityofLosAngeles,andthereforethesitefunctionsasapartoftheeasterngatewaytotheSunsetStrip.TheProject vicinity ishighlyurbanizedandgenerallybuilt‐out. TheProjectSite,with frontageonSunsetBoulevard, lies in themore active regional center of Hollywoodwith itsmixed‐use blend of commercial,restaurant,bars,studio/production,office,entertainmentandhighdensityresidentialuses.

The Project would include approximately 111,339 square feet of commercial retail and restaurant useswithin three lower levels (ofwhich one level is subterranean) and one rooftop level, and 249 apartmentunits,including28affordablehousingunits,withintwelvelevelsrepresenting222,564grosssquarefeetofresidential space. Theprojectwouldalsoprovideanew,approximately9,134square‐footpublicspaceatthenortheastcorneroftheProjectSite(thisareais,andwillcontinuetobe,ownedbytheCity,althoughtheApplicantwillberequiredto improveandmaintain thearea),a34,050square‐footcentralpublicplazaatthesiteinterior,publicrooftopdeck/gardenareasalongSunsetBoulevard,aprivatepoolandpooldeckareaforresidents,aswellasotherresident‐onlyamenitiestotalingapproximately6,900squarefeetthatwouldinclude a residential lobby, resident recreation room, fitness center, business center, changing roomsandlibrary.Parkingforallproposeduseswouldbeprovidedon‐siteviaaseven‐level(ofwhichthreelevelsaresubterranean or semi‐subterranean) parking structure housedwithin the podium structure that includes849totalparkingspaces(295forresidentialusesand554forcommercialretailandrestaurantuses).Short‐andlong‐termbicycleparkingtotalingapproximately985spaceswouldalsobeprovidedon‐site,including

Executive Summary November 2014


428spacesforresidentialusesand557spacesforcommercialuses. Thetotaldevelopmentwouldincludeupto333,872squarefeetofcommercialandresidentialspacewithamaximumfloor‐arearatio(FAR)of3:1.

C. PUBLIC REVIEW PROCESS

AsfurtherdescribedinChapter1,Introduction,theCitycirculatedaNoticeofPreparation(“NOP”)toState,regional,andlocalagencies,andmembersofthepublicfora33‐dayreviewperiod,commencingSeptember13,2013andendingOctober15,2013. Thepurposeof theNOPwasto formallyconveythattheCitywaspreparingaDraftEIRfortheproposedProject,andtosolicit inputregardingthescopeandcontentof theenvironmental information to be included in the Draft EIR. See Appendix A‐1, Initial Study/Notice ofPreparation,ofthisDraftEIR.

Inaddition,apublicscopingmeetingwasheldonOctober2,2013from5:30P.M.to7:30P.M.attheWillandAriel Durant Branch Library, located at 7140 W. Sunset Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90046. Thepresentationmaterialsandotherdocumentation from theScopingMeetingareprovided inAppendixA‐3,ScopingMeetingMaterials, of this Draft EIR, while public comments received at the ScopingMeeting arecontainedinAppendixA‐4,ScopingMeetingPublicComments.ThisDraftEIRwillbereleasedforaminimum45‐day public comment period. Following the public comment period, a Final EIRwill be prepared thatincludesresponsestothecommentsontheDraftEIR.

D. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY/ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED

151writtencommentlettersrespondingtotheNOPweresubmittedtotheCity.ResponsestotheNOPwereprovided by various public agencies, including the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research,California Native Heritage Commission, South Coast Air Quality Management District, City Bureau ofEngineering, Los Angeles Police Department, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority,and the City of West Hollywood; several private organizations, including the Los Angeles Conservancy,Laurel Canyon Association, Crescent Heights‐Havenhurst Neighborhood Preservation Association, theFederationofHillsideandCanyonAssociations,AllaNazimovaSociety,GranvilleHomeownersAssociation,the Stanley Hills Drive Community of Neighbors, and West Hollywood Preservation Alliance; and 102individuals. Inaddition,approximately70individualsattendedthepublicscopingmeeting,andcommentswerereceived inwritingonthescopeandcontentof theDraftEIR. Environmentalconcernsraised inthepubliccommentsreceivedduringtheNOPcirculationperiodareprovidedinAppendixA‐2,NOPComments,ofthisDraftEIRandsummarizedbelow:

Trafficimpactsonlocalstreets,intersections,andfreeways

Effectoftrafficislandconversionontrafficflow,safety,andaccesstopublictransit

Cumulativeimpactsassociatedwithotherdevelopmentprojectsinthearea

Setbacksandconsistencywithzoningrequirements

Noiseandvibrationfromconstructionactivities

Noisefromadditionalvehicletrafficandoutdoorevents/activities

Effectsonviewsfromhillsidesandsurroundingneighborhoods

November 2014 Executive Summary


Directandindirecteffectstoon‐andoff‐sitehistoricresources, includingtheexistingon‐siteBankbuilding

Construction‐relatedhaultrucktrafficimpacts

Heightofproposedstructuresandassociated impactsrelatedtovisualcharacterandcompatibilitywithsurroundingdevelopment

Vehicularaccessandinternalvehiclecirculation,includingdeliveryandtrashtrucks

ProjectAlternativestobeconsidered

Impactstopublictransitservices

TypeandextentofsignageandlightingfortheProject,andimpactstosurroundinguses

Impactsrelatedtoemergencyvehicleaccessandresponsetimes

EnergyconsumptionoftheProject

Adequacyofwastewaterandsolidwastedisposalfacilities

Impacts associated with the adequacy of off‐street parking to serve the Project during bothconstructionandoperation

Impactsrelatedtohelipadoperationandassociatedsafetyandnoiseimpacts

AirqualityimpactsresultingfromconstructionandoperationoftheProject

Glareeffectsfrombuildingsurfacesandglass

Healtheffectsofparkinggarageexhaustandairpollutantemissionsfromadditionaltrafficonlocalstreets

Riskstolifeandpropertyfromearthquakefaults

Healthrisksassociatedwithpotentialhazardousmaterialslocatedon‐site

ImpactstowatersupplyfromoperationoftheProject

FloodanderosionhazardsassociatedwithadditionalrunofffromtheProjectSite

Inducementofpopulationgrowthintheareaanddemandsforpublicservicesandinfrastructure

ImpactstoundiscoveredNativeAmericanorotherarchaeologicalresourcesontheProjectSite

Potentialimpactsrelatedtoodorsfromon‐siteuses,particularlyfromoutdoorareas

Project‐relatedgreenhousegasemissionsandimpactstoglobalclimatechange

E. SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Significant unavoidable impacts could occur as a result of Project impacts, cumulative impacts, and as asecondary effect from the implementation of a mitigation measure. Based on the analysis contained inChapter4,EnvironmentalImpactAnalysis,andChapter6,OtherCEQAConsiderations,theProjectwouldresultin significant historical resources impacts, significant construction noise and vibration impacts, andsignificantconstruction‐relatedtrafficimpacts.



F. ALTERNATIVES

The State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(a) require an EIR to “describe the range of reasonablealternatives to theproject, or to the locationof theproject,whichwould feasibly attainmostof thebasicobjectivesoftheprojectbutwillavoidorsubstantiallylessenanyofthesignificanteffectsoftheproject,andevaluatethecomparativemeritsofthealternatives.”TheStateCEQAGuidelinesemphasizethattheselectionofprojectalternativesbebasedprimarilyontheabilitytoreducesignificantimpactsrelativetotheproposedproject,“evenifthesealternativeswouldimpedetosomedegreetheattainmentoftheprojectobjectives,orwouldbemorecostly.”1TheStateCEQAGuidelinesfurtherdirectthattherangeofalternativesbeguidedbya“ruleofreason,”suchthatonlythosealternativesnecessarytopermitareasonedchoiceareanalyzed.2

Asdescribed indetail inChapter5.0,Alternatives,of thisDraftEIR, the followingeightalternatives to theProject were analyzed: 1) No Project/No Build Alternative; 2) Existing Zoning Alternative; 3) ReducedHeightAlternative;4)ReducedDensityAlternative;5)BankPreservationAlternative;6)ReducedHeightandBankPreservationAlternative;7)On‐MenuAlternative;and8)ResidentialandHotelAlternative.Basedonan analysis of these alternatives, an environmentally superior alternative is identified. The eightalternatives,aswellastheenvironmentallysuperioralternative,aresummarizedbelow.

1. Alternative 1: No Project/No Build Alternative

UnderAlternative1,theNoProject/NoBuildAlternative,theProjectSitewouldnotbeimprovedorchangedfrom its current condition. Existinguses, including80,000square feetof retail, bank, restaurants,offices,and art storage, would continue to operate as under existing conditions. Parkingwould remain at 222spaces.ThereconfigurationoftheadjacentCity‐ownedtrafficislandatthesouthwestcornerofSunsetandCrescentHeightsBoulevardstoprovidea9,134‐square‐footpublicspace(i.e., theCornerPlaza)wouldnotoccur.

2. Alternative 2: Existing Zoning Alternative

Under Alternative 2, the Existing Zoning Alternative, all existing buildings would be demolished and theProjectSitewouldbedevelopedwith111,339squarefeetofnewcommercialusestobelocatedinthreenewbuildings. Thisrepresentsanetincreaseof31,339squarefeetofcommercialretailusescomparedtotheexisting80,000squarefeetofretail,office,restaurant,andbankuses. Totaldevelopmentwouldconsistof111,339squarefeetoffloorarea,whichwouldbethesameamountofcommercialdevelopmentasundertheProject,butwithamaximumFARof1:1andmaximumbuildingheightsof45 feet (asmeasured fromthelowestelevationontheProjectSiteatthesouthwestcorneroftheproperty).NoresidentialuseswouldbedevelopedunderthisAlternativeandtheadjacentCity‐ownedtraffic islandat thesouthwestcornerof theSunsetBoulevard/CrescentHeightsBoulevardintersectionwouldnotbeimprovedtoprovideapublicplaza.Vehicular site access would be provided via at‐grade driveways on Sunset Boulevard, Crescent HeightsBoulevard,andHavenhurstDrive,andon‐siteparkingwouldbeprovidedviaasurfaceparkinglotandnewstructuredparkinglevels,withrooftopparking.

1 CEQAGuidelinesSection15126.6(b).2 Ibid.,Section15126.6(f).



3. Alternative 3: Reduced Height Alternative

Alternative3,theReducedHeightAlternative,wouldincludethesamedevelopmentintensityastheProjectwithamaximumFARof3:1,butwitha25percentreductioninthemaximumheightoftheProject.AswiththeProject, thisAlternativewouldentail thedevelopmentof249residentialunits, including28affordablehousingunits,and111,339square feetofcommercialusesoveracentralpodiumstructure. TheReducedHeightAlternativewouldhave the samedevelopment intensity and floor area as the Project, but a loweroverall buildingheight, representedby a four‐story reduction at the taller tower component of the SouthBuilding and a one‐story increase at the lower component of the SouthBuilding. BuildingheightswouldrangefromtwostoriesfortheNorthBuildingalongSunsetBoulevard,tenstoriesattheeasternportionoftheSouthBuilding,comparedtoninestoriesundertheProject,andtwelvestories,comparedto16storiesunder the Project, at the western portion of the South Building.3 All uses, including residential, retail,restaurant,supermarket,healthclub,andwalk‐inbank,wouldhavethesamefloorareaastheProject. AllotherProject‐relatedimprovements,facilities,andamenities, includinglandscapedplazas,streettrees,andtheconversionoftheCity‐ownedtrafficislandtoprovidea9,134‐square‐footpublicspace,wouldbesimilartothoseoftheProject.UnderthisAlternative,allexistingbuildingswouldberemovedfromtheProjectSite.

4. Alternative 4: Reduced Density Alternative

Alternative4, theReducedDensityAlternative,wouldreduceoveralldevelopment intensityby25percentrelative to the Project. Thiswould allow for 187 residential units, including 21 affordable housing units,comparedto249unitsincluding28affordableunitsundertheProject,and83,500squarefeetofcommercialuses,comparedto111,339squarefeetundertheProject,foramaximumFARof2.25:1. Thegrocerystorefloorareawouldbe18,605squarefeet,comparedto24,811squarefeetundertheProject.Totalresidentialfloorareawouldbe167,585squarefeet,comparedto222,564squarefeetundertheProject.Totalfloorareawouldbe251,377squarefeet,comparedto333,903squarefeetundertheProject.Buildingheightswouldremain the sameas theProject, ranging from twostories at theNorthBuilding to16 stories at theSouthBuilding. The reduced floor area would result in similar building footprints but an overall reduction inmassingbyremoving two floors fromthe lowerportionof theSouthBuilding foraheightofseven floors,while maintaining taller 16‐story South Building tower and the two‐story North Building as under theProject.4 All other Project‐related improvements, facilities, and amenities, including landscaped plazas,street trees, and the conversion of the adjacent City‐owned traffic island to provide a 9,134 square‐footpublicspace,wouldbesimilartothoseoftheProject.UnderthisAlternative,allexistingbuildingswouldberemovedfromtheProjectSite.

5. Alternative 5: Bank Preservation Alternative

Alternative 5, the Bank Preservation Alternative, would include the development of a mixed‐useresidential/commercialprojectontheProjectSiteatthesameoverall intensityastheProject,whichhasamaximumFARof3:1. However,thisAlternativewouldincreaseresidentialunitsanddecreasecommercialfloorareacompared to theProject. TheBankPreservationAlternativewouldpreserve theon‐siteChaseBankbuilding in its current location. Specifically, thisAlternativewouldentail the removalof all existing3 DuetotheslopingnatureoftheProjectSite,the12‐storyportionoftheSouthBuildingwouldappeartobe16storiesinheightatthe

southwestareaoftheProjectSitealongHavenhurstDrive.4 DuetotheslopingnatureoftheProjectSite,the16‐storyportionoftheSouthBuildingwouldappeartobe20storiesinheightatthe

southwestareaoftheProjectSitealongHavenhurstDrive.



buildingsontheProjectSiteexcepttheBankbuilding.Alternative5wouldcomprisethedevelopmentof291residentialunitsincluding32affordablehousingunits,comparedto249residentialunitswith28affordableunitsundertheProject,and62,231squarefeetofcommercialuses,comparedto111,339squarefeetunderthe Project. Total residential floor areawould be 271,969 square feet, compared to 222,564 square feetundertheProject. Grocerystorefloorareawouldbeupto15,000squarefeet,comparedto24,811squarefeetundertheProject.Totaldevelopmentwouldconsistofapproximately334,200squarefeet,comparedtoatotalof333,903squarefeetundertheProject. BuildingheightsunderthisAlternativewouldrangefromtwostoriesattheSunsetBoulevardretailfrontageto16storiesattheSouthBuilding,andthemassingofthebuildingswould vary from that of the Project.5 Specifically, the South Buildingwould include two towerelements,onealongHavenhurstDriveat16storiesinheight(orapproximately200feetabovegrade)andthe other along Crescent Heights Boulevard at eight stories in height (or approximately 110 feet abovegrade), while the central portion of the building would be a maximum of six stories in height (orapproximately75feetabovegrade).TheSunsetretailfrontagewouldincludetheexistingBankbuilding,anewretailstructurewestoftheBankBuildingatthecornerofHavenhurstDriveandSunsetBoulevard,andanew “flagship” retail building east of the Bank building at the corner of Sunset Boulevard and CrescentHeights Boulevard. Given the preservation of the Bank building, no rooftop activity would occur at thenorthwestcorneroftheProjectSite.Inaddition,arooftopbar/loungewouldnotbedevelopedatthetopoftheSouthBuilding. Preservationof theBankbuildingunder thisAlternativewould increase thedepthofexcavationnecessarytoconstructbelow‐gradeparkingsincetheareaundertheBankbuildingwouldnotbeusedforparking,asitwouldbeundertheProject.AlthoughtheBankPreservationAlternative,aswiththeProject, would provide three subterranean parking levels, additional excavation would be requiredcompared to the Project to provide parking. All other Project‐related improvements, facilities, andamenities, such as landscaping and the conversion of the adjacent City‐owned traffic island to provide a9,134square‐footpublicspacewouldbesimilartothoseoftheProject.

Under the Bank Preservation Alternative, as noted above, the Bank building would be retained andrehabilitated for commercial use in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s RehabilitationStandards(Standards).Alterationsnecessaryforcommercialusewouldincludereplacementoftheexistingnon‐original ground floorwindows and replacement of exterior ground floorwalls on the south and eastelevations with new compatible windows, to improve transparency and views through the building. Inaddition, theexisting false clerestorywindowswouldbe replacedwithnewcompatiblewindows toallownaturallightintotheupperfloorandprovideviewsthroughthenewclerestorywindowsofthefolded‐plateroof.Thedouble‐heightinterioratriumspacewouldbeclosedbyfillinginthemezzaninelevelwithanewfloor. Thenewsecond floorwouldbedesigned tobe reversible, and the existingmezzaninebalconyandrailingswouldberemovedandstored,sothattheatriumcouldbereinstatedatafuturedate.Theinteriorwouldberepurposed for thenewcommercialusewhichwouldrequire relocationofRogerDarricarrere’sdalle de verre stained glass Screen, either within the Bank building, elsewhere within the Project, or toanother appropriate sitewhere itwould be preserved. The floating concrete stair at theBank building’snortheast cornerwouldberetained inplaceor rotated180degrees. Thealterationsandadditionsat thewest end of the Bank building would be removed. The original Bouquet Canyon stone wall would beretained on the north façade along Sunset Boulevard, andTheFamily, by sculptorDavid Greenwould beretained and preserved in approximately its current location. The Sunset Boulevard frontage would beimprovedwithcompatiblelandscapinginkeepingwiththeoriginalMid‐CenturyModerndesignintent. To

5 DuetotheslopingnatureoftheProjectSite,the16‐storyportionoftheSouthBuildingwouldappeartobe20storiesinheightatthe




ensure conformance with the Standards, a qualified preservation consultant would be retained by theapplicant to provide input during design development, review the plans for the Bank PreservationAlternative for conformance with the Standards, and conduct construction monitoring to addresspreservationissuesthatcouldariseduringconstruction.

6. Alternative 6: Reduced Height and Bank Preservation Alternative

Alternative6, theReducedHeightandBankPreservationAlternative,would include thedevelopmentofamixed‐use residential/commercial project on the Project Site at the same overall intensity as the Project(maximum FAR of 3:1), but would increase residential units and decrease commercial floor area. ThisAlternativewould also preserve the on‐site Chase Bank building in its current location. Specifically, thisAlternativewouldentail the removalofall existingbuildingson theProjectSiteexcept theBankbuilding.Totaldevelopmentwouldconsistof291residentialunits,including32affordablehousingunits,and62,231squarefeetofcommercialuses,includingareducedgrocerystoreuseofupto15,000squarefeet(comparedto 24,811 square feet under the Project). Building heights under this Alternativewould range from twostoriesat theSunsetBoulevard retail frontage to16 stories at theSouthBuilding, and themassingof thebuildingswould vary from that of the Project.6 Specifically, the South Buildingwould include two towerelements,onealongHavenhurstDriveat14storiesinheight(orapproximately178feetabovegrade)andtheotheralongCrescentHeightsBoulevardat12storiesinheight(orapproximately155feetabovegrade),whilethecentralportionofthebuildingwouldbeamaximumofsixstoriesinheight(orapproximately75feetabovegrade).TheSunsetretailfrontagewouldincludetheexistingBankbuilding,anewretailstructurewest of the BankBuilding at the corner ofHavenhurstDrive and Sunset Boulevard, and a new “flagship”retailbuildingeastoftheBankbuildingatthecornerofSunsetBoulevardandCrescentHeightsBoulevard.DuetothepreservationoftheBankbuilding,norooftopactivitywouldoccuratthenorthwestcorneroftheProjectSite. Inaddition, therooftopbar/loungewouldnotbedevelopedat the topof theSouthBuilding.PreservationoftheBankbuildingunderthisAlternativewouldincreasethedepthofexcavationnecessarytoconstructbelow‐gradeparkingsincetheareaunderneaththebankbuildingwouldnotbeusedforparking,as it is under theProject. AlthoughAlternative 6, aswith theProject,wouldprovide three subterraneanparking levels, additional excavationwould be required compared to theProject to provideparking. AllotherProject‐relatedimprovements,facilities,andamenitiessuchaslandscapingandtheconversionoftheadjacentCity‐ownedtrafficislandtoprovidea9,134square‐footpublicspacewouldbesimilartothoseoftheProject.

UndertheReducedHeightandBankPreservationAlternative,asnotedabove,theBankbuildingwouldberetained and rehabilitated for commercial use in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’sRehabilitationStandards(Standards).Alterationsnecessaryforcommercialusewouldincludereplacementof the existing non‐original ground floorwindows and replacement of exterior ground floorwalls on thesouthandeastelevationswithnewcompatiblewindows, to improve transparencyandviews through thebuilding. In addition, the existing false clerestory windows would be replaced with new compatiblewindowstoallownaturallightintotheupperfloorandprovideviewsthroughthenewclerestorywindowsofthefolded‐plateroof.Thedouble‐heightinterioratriumspacewouldbeclosedbyfillinginthemezzaninelevelwithanewfloor.Thenewsecondfloorwouldbedesignedtobereversible,andtheexistingmezzaninebalconyandrailingswouldberemovedandstored,sothattheatriumcouldbereinstatedatafuturedate.

6 DuetotheslopingnatureoftheProjectSite,the16‐storyportionoftheSouthBuildingwouldappeartobe20storiesinheightatthe




The interiorwould be repurposed for the new commercial usewhichwould require relocation of RogerDarricarrere’s dalle de verre stained glass Screen, either within the Bank building, elsewhere within theProject,ortoanotherappropriatesitewhereitwouldbepreserved.ThefloatingconcretestairattheBankbuilding’snortheastcornerwouldberetainedinplaceorrotated180degrees.ThealterationsandadditionsatthewestendoftheBankbuildingwouldberemoved.TheoriginalBouquetCanyonstonewallwouldberetained on the north façade along Sunset Boulevard, andTheFamily, by sculptorDavid Greenwould beretained and preserved in approximately its current location. The Sunset Boulevard frontage would beimprovedwithcompatiblelandscapinginkeepingwiththeoriginalMid‐CenturyModerndesignintent. Toensure conformance with the Standards, a qualified preservation consultant would be retained by theapplicant toprovide inputduringdesigndevelopment, review theplans for theReducedHeightandBankPreservation Alternative for conformance with the Standards, and conduct construction monitoring toaddresspreservationissuesthatcouldariseduringconstruction.

7. Alternative 7: On‐Menu Alternative

Alternative 7, the On‐Menu Alternative, would involve the construction of a new 28‐story residentialcondominium towerover retailusesandstructuredparking levels,butwouldretainanumberofexistinguses on the Project Site, including the existing Chase Bank building and fast food drive‐thru restaurant.Under Alternative 7, the Bank building would be retained and rehabilitated for commercial use inconformancewiththeSecretaryoftheInterior’sRehabilitationStandards(Standards),asunderAlternatives5and6describedabove.TheOn‐MenuAlternativewouldqualifyfora3:1FARforaportionoftheProjectSite pursuant to LAMC Section 12.22‐A,25(f)(4)(ii) and a 1.35 FAR for the balance of the Project SitepursuanttoLAMCSection12.22‐A,25(f)(4)(i).TheAlternativewouldhaveanoverallFARofapproximately2.5:1.ThisAlternativewouldprovide146residentialunitsincluding30affordablehousingunits(comparedto 249 unitswith 28 affordable units under the Project). Commercial uses, including existing uses to beretained and new retail construction, would comprise approximately 47,500 square feet of floor area(comparedto111,339squarefeetofcommercialfloorareaundertheProject),areductionofapproximately57‐percentcomparedtotheProject.Totalresidentialfloorareawouldbe228,032squarefeet(comparedto222,564 square feet under theProject),which includes resident‐only amenities such as apool/pooldeck,recreation room, resident bar/lounge, fitness room, business center/library, changing rooms, and privateterraces. Total floor areawould be 278,032 square feet,which represents an over 17‐percent reductioncompared to the Project, which has a total developed floor area of 333,903 square feet. The residentialcomponentwould include 116market rate units (31 one‐bedroom, 50 two‐bedroom, 23 three‐bedroom,and12four‐bedroomunits)and30affordableone‐bedroomunitsin23storiesoverfivelevelsofstructuredabove‐ andbelow‐gradeparking. Commercial useswould include retail space, sit‐down restaurants, fast‐food restaurants (existing), and awalk‐in bank (existing). Building heights under this Alternativewouldreachamaximumof28stories. Becausecommercial floorareawouldbesubstantiallyreducedandretailuses,suchasthegrocerystoreproposedundertheProjectwouldnotbeprovided,parkingrequirementsforthe On‐Menu Alternative would be substantially reduced compared to the Project. Thus, the Project’ssubterraneanparkingLevelB2wouldbeeliminatedandasizeablereductioninProject‐relatedgradingandexcavationvolumeswouldbeachieved.On‐siteamenitieswouldincludepublicandprivateopenspace,suchastheCornerPlaza,CentralPlaza,roofterraces,andpooldeck,aswellaslandscapingandtheconversionoftheadjacentCity‐ownedtrafficislandtoprovidea9,134square‐footpublicspacewouldbesimilartothoseoftheProject.



8. Alternative 8: Residential and Hotel Alternative

Alternative8,theResidentialandHotelAlternative,wouldremoveallexistingbuildingsfromtheProjectSitefortheconstructionofresidentialcondominiums,afull‐service,180‐roomhotel,andrestaurantspacewithinthehotel.TheAlternativewouldhaveanFARofapproximately3:1,andwouldhaveanearlyidenticaldesignto the Projectwith a 9‐ to 16‐story South Building containing hotel and residential uses and a two‐storyNorth Building containing hotel accessory uses over a single podium structure.7 This Alternative wouldprovide 115 residential units including 13 affordable housing units (compared to 249 units including 28affordable units under theProject). Thehotel and related accessoryuseswould comprise approximately153,381 square feet of floor area (compared to 111,339 square feet of commercial floor area under theProject).Totalresidentialfloorareawouldbe179,888squarefeet(comparedto222,564squarefeetundertheProject).Totalfloorareawouldbe333,269squarefeet,whichrepresentsasmallreductioncomparedtotheProject,whichhasatotaldevelopedfloorareaof333,903squarefeet.Thehotelusewouldcomprise135standardroomsand45suitesinthe9‐storyportionoftheSouthBuildingoverstructuredabove‐andbelow‐grade parking. Hotel accessory uses would include a restaurant, bar/lounge, fitness center, and meetingrooms. Becausecommercialfloorareawouldbesubstantiallyreducedandretailuses,suchasthegrocerystoreproposedundertheProject,wouldnotbeprovided,parkingrequirementsfortheResidentialandHotelAlternativewouldbesomewhatreducedcomparedtotheProject.Thus,theProject’ssubterraneanparkingLevel B2 would be reduced in area by over 50 percent, and thus a sizeable reduction in Project‐relatedgrading and excavation volumeswould be achieved.8 On‐site amenities, whichwould include public andprivateopenspace,CentralPlaza,roofterraces,pooldeck,androoftoprestaurant/lounge,landscaping,andtheconversionoftheadjacentCity‐ownedtrafficislandtoprovidethe9,134square‐footpublicCornerPlazawouldbesimilartothoseoftheProject.

9. Environmentally Superior Alternative

Section15126.6(e)(2)of theStateCEQAGuidelines indicates thatananalysisofalternatives toaproposedprojectshallidentifyanenvironmentallysuperioralternativeamongthealternativesevaluatedinanEIRandthatifthe“noproject”alternativeistheenvironmentallysuperioralternative,theEIRshallidentifyanotherenvironmentally superior alternative among the remaining alternatives. With respect to identifying anEnvironmentally Superior Alternative among those analyzed in this Draft EIR, the range of feasibleAlternatives includes the No Project/No Build Alternative, Existing Zoning Alternative, Reduced HeightAlternative, Reduced Density Alternative, Bank Preservation Alternative, Reduced Height and BankPreservationAlternative,On‐MenuAlternative,andResidentialandHotelAlternative.

The No Project/No Build Alternative is considered the overall environmentally superior Alternative as itwouldavoidnearlyalloftheimpactsthatwouldoccurundertheProject.Itshouldbenotedhowever,thatalthoughmostimpactswouldbeavoidedundertheNoProject/NoBuildAlternative,beneficialaspectsoftheProject, such as the upgrading of the property with distinctive architecture and landscaping and thefulfillmentofnumerousregionalandCityplanandpolicygoalsfortheareawouldnotoccur. Asindicated

7 DuetotheslopingnatureoftheProjectSite,the16‐storybuildingwouldappeartobe20storiesinheightatthesouthwestareaof

theProjectSitealongHavenhurstDrive.8 TheProjectwouldprovide849totalparkingspaces,with373spacesprovidedonLevelB2. Alternative8wouldprovideatotalof

641 totalparkingspaces,or208 fewerspaces thanunder theProject. Given thesameparkingconfiguration, this translates toareductionofapproximately55percentfewerspacesrequiredonLevelB2(208/373=55.8%).



above,withoutdevelopmentof amixed‐use residential andcommercialprojectat theProjectSite, theNoProject/NoBuildAlternativewouldonlypartiallymeetoneoftheProject’s15objectives.

In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines requirement to identify an environmentally superiorAlternative other than the No Project/No Build Alternative, a comparative evaluation of the remainingAlternatives indicates that the Reduced Height and Bank Preservation Alternative would be theenvironmentallysuperiorAlternative.ThisAlternativewouldeliminateasignificantunavoidableimpacttohistoricalresourcesthroughpreservationandreuseoftheBankbuilding,wouldreducebutnoteliminateasignificantunavoidabletemporaryimpactassociatedwithconstruction‐relatednoise,andwouldotherwisereduce themajority of Project‐related impacts to some degree. More specifically, this Alternativewouldresultinreducedimpactsassociatedwithviews,shade/shadow,operationalairquality,historicalresources,greenhousegasemissions,landusecompatibility,constructionnoise,localintersectiontraffic,neighborhoodroadway segment traffic, and solidwaste. TheReducedHeight andBankPreservationAlternativewouldresult in similar impacts regarding visual character, light and glare, AQMP consistency, construction airquality, geology and soils, consistencywith GHG reduction plans, land use plan consistency, constructionvibration, operational noise and vibration, population growth, housing supply, fire protection, and policeprotection. ThisAlternativewould result in incrementally greater impacts for other topicsdue increasedexcavation and an increase of 42 residential units. As with the Project, and with the exception ofconstruction traffic, these impacts associated with employment, libraries, water supply, and wastewaterwouldbelessthansignificant,andimpactsassociatedwitharchaeologicalandpaleontologicalresourcesandparksandrecreationwouldbelessthansignificantwithmitigation.Assuch,theReducedHeightandBankPreservationAlternativeisconsideredenvironmentallysuperioramongthevariousbuildAlternatives.

None of the build Alternatives, including the Reduced Height and Bank Preservation Alternative, wouldeliminate the significant unavoidable temporary impacts related to construction noise and vibration, andonlytheExistingZoningAlternativewouldeliminatethetemporaryconstructiontrafficimpact.ThreeoftheAlternativeswouldpreserveandreusetheexistingBankbuilding(BankPreservationAlternative,ReducedHeight and Bank Preservation Alternative, and On‐Menu Alternative), thus eliminating a significantunavoidable impact to historical resources. While both the Bank Preservation Alternative and ReducedHeightandBankPreservationAlternativewouldresultinthefewestsignificantunavoidableimpacts(threesignificant unavoidable impacts) of the build Alternatives, the Reduced Height and Bank PreservationAlternative would, overall, reduce more impacts relative to the Project than the Bank PreservationAlternative.

Additionally,theReducedHeightandBankPreservationAlternativewouldonlypartiallymeetthreeofthekey Project objectives related to provision of commercial uses for on‐site residents and the surroundingcommunity and increasing economic activity and employment opportunities. Specifically, the ReducedHeight andBankPreservationAlternativewouldprovide convenient andhigh‐quality commercial uses toserve both Project residents and the surrounding community, and also enhance the character of theneighborhood,butitwouldnotcontributetoasynergyofsiteusesattheleveltheProjectwouldduetothereducedcommercialfloorarea.Further,thisAlternativewouldmaintainandenhancetheeconomicvitalityof the region by providing job opportunities associatedwith the construction and operation of proposeduses, and would attract commercial and residential tenants to the Project, but would provide fewer jobopportunitiesandreducedon‐siteeconomicactivityduetothereductionincommercialuses.However,thisAlternativewouldachievetheremainingProjectobjectives.



G. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

This section provides a summary of impacts, Project Design Features, mitigation measures, and level ofimpactafter implementationofmitigationmeasuresassociatedwithProject. Thesummaryisprovidedbyenvironmental issue area below inTableES‐1, Summary ofProject Impacts,ProjectDesign Features, andMitigationMeasures.



Table ES‐1

Summary of Project Impacts, Project Design Features, and Mitigation Measures

EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificance4.AAesthetics

4.A.1VisualCharacter

Impact Statement AES‐1: TheProject would provide a modernbuilding design, street trees, andlandscaped public open space. Assuch, once constructed, the Projectwould have a less than significantimpact with respect to aestheticcharacter. However, constructionactivities on‐site could substantiallyalter or degrade the existing visualcharacter of the area on a temporarybasis. Therefore, the Project wouldhave a potentially significant impactwith respect to aesthetic characterduringconstruction.

NotApplicable Mitigation Measure AES‐1: TheApplicant shall provide a 12‐footconstruction fence for neighborhoodprotection during construction of theProject.Mitigation Measure AES‐2: TheApplicant shall ensure throughappropriate postings and daily visualinspections that no unauthorizedmaterials are posted on any temporaryconstruction barriers or temporarypedestrian walkways, and that suchtemporary barriers and walkways aremaintained in a visually attractivemanner throughout the constructionperiod.

LessthanSignificantafterMitigation

4.A.2ViewImpacts Impact Statement AES‐2: TheProject would not obstruct focal orpanoramic views across the ProjectSiteoralteranexistingrecognizedorvalued public view. As such, impactsin this regard would be less thansignificant.

NotApplicable Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. LessthanSignificant

4.A.3LightandGlare

ImpactStatementAES‐3: Newlight sources associated primarilywiththeProject’sresidentialusesandterrace dining areas would notsubstantiallyalterthecharacterofoff‐



Table ES‐1 (Continued)



EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancesiteareassurroundingtheProjectSiteor result in substantial light spill/orglare onto adjacent light‐sensitivereceptors. The Project would bedesignedwithnon‐reflectiveglassandtrim and, thus, reduce reflectionpotential. Therefore, potentialimpacts associated with nighttimeillumination and glare from reflectedsunlightwouldbelessthansignificant.4.A.4Shading Impact Statement AES‐4: TheProject would not shade shadow‐sensitive uses for more than threehours between the hours of 9:00a.m.and3:00p.m.PST,ormore than fourhoursbetween thehoursof9:00a.m.and 5:00 p.m. PDT. Shade/shadowimpactswouldbelessthansignificant.


4.A.5 ConsistencyWithRegulatoryFramework

Impact Statement AES‐5: TheProject would be substantiallyconsistent with applicable guidelinesorregulationsrelatedtoaestheticsorvisual quality. Impactswouldbe lessthansignificant.


4.BAirQuality 4.B.1 AirQualityManagementPlan(AQMP)Consistency

Impact Statement AQ‐1:Construction and operation of theProject would not conflict with the






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancegrowth projections in the SCAQMDAQMP and would comply withapplicable control measures. As aresult, the Project would not conflictwith or obstruct implementation ofthe Plan and impacts would be lessthansignificant.4.B.2AirQualityStandards Impact Statement AQ‐2:Constructionof theProjectwouldnotexceed the applicable SCAQMD dailynumeric indicators for VOC, CO, SO2,PM10, or PM2.5 but would potentiallyexceedthenumeric indicator forNOX.Operation of the Project would notexceed the SCAQMD daily regionalnumeric indicators. As a result,construction of the Project wouldresult in a potentially significant airquality impact for NOX duringconstruction. With respect tooperations, the Project would notviolate any air quality standard orcontributesubstantiallytoanexistingor projected air quality violation andoperational impacts would be lessthansignificant.

PDF‐AQ‐1: Green BuildingMeasures: The Project would bedesigned and operated to meet orexceedtheapplicablerequirementsoftheStateofCaliforniaGreenBuildingStandards Code and the City of LosAngeles Green Building Code andachieve the USGBC LEED® SilverCertification. The Project wouldincorporate measures andperformancestandardstosupport itsLEED® Silver Certification, whichinclude but are not limited to thefollowing:

TheProjectwouldimplementaconstruction wastemanagement plan to recycleand/or salvage a minimum of75 percent of nonhazardousconstruction debris orminimize the generation ofconstruction waste to 2.5pounds per square foot ofbuilding floor area. (LEED®

Mitigation Measure AQ‐1: TheApplicant shall utilize off‐road diesel‐powered construction equipment thatmeetTier3off‐roademissionsstandardsfor those equipment rated at 50 hp orgreater and Tier 4 off‐road emissionsstandards for those equipment rated at200 hp or greater during thegrading/excavation and buildingconstruction phases of Projectconstruction. A copy of each unit’scertified tier specification and CARB orSCAQMD operating permit shall beavailable upon request at the time ofmobilization of each applicable unit ofequipment. The Applicant shallencourage construction contractors toapply for SCAQMD “SOON” finds.Incentives could be provided for thoseconstruction contractors who apply forSCAQMD “SOON” funds. The “SOON”program provides funds to accelerateclean‐upofoff‐roaddieselvehicles,suchas heavy‐duty construction equipment.More information on this program can






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceMaterials andResourcesCredit5[v4]9);

TheProjectwould be designedto optimize energyperformance and reducebuilding energy cost by 10percent for new constructioncompared to ASHRAE 90.1‐2010,AppendixGandtheTitle24 Building Standards Code.Theenergyoptimizationwouldbe achieved by incorporatingenergy efficient designs thatmay include energy efficientheating, ventilation, and HVACsystems, energy efficientwindows, energy efficientinsulation,orotherappropriatemeasures. Prior to buildingpermit issuance, sufficientproof of energy optimizationshall be made available inaccordance with LEED®, whichmay include building energysimulations, past energysimulation analyses for similarbuildings, or published datafrom analyses for similarbuildings. (LEED® Energy andAtmosphereCredit2[v4]);

be found at the following website:http://www.aqmd.gov/tao/Implementation/SOONProgram.htm.

9 Thebracketedtext“v4”denotesversion4oftheLEED®BuildingDesignandConstructioncredits.





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificance

The Project would reduceemissions through the use ofgrid‐source, renewable energytechnologies and carbonmitigationprojects.TheProjectwould engage in a contract forqualified resources, for aminimum of five years, to bedeliveredatleastannually.Thecontract would specify theprovisionof100percentof theProject’s energy fromgreenpower, carbon offsets,and/orrenewableenergycertificates (“RECs”)during the first five years ofoperation. The Project wouldcommit to providing aminimumof 15percentof theProject’s energy from greenpower, carbon offsets, and/orRECs for two years after theminimum five year period.(LEED® Energy andAtmosphereCredit7[v4]);and

The Project would reduceindoorwaterusebyaminimumof 35 percent by installingwater fixtures that exceedapplicable standards. (LEED®WaterEfficiencyCredit2[v4]).





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificance4.B.3Non‐AttainmentPollutants Impact Statement AQ‐3:Construction of the Project wouldpotentially exceed the SCAQMD dailyregional numeric indicators foremissions of NOX, which is an ozoneprecursor. Operation of the Projectwould not exceed the SCAQMD dailyregional numeric indicators foremissions of non‐attainmentpollutants. Thus, construction of theProject would potentially result in acumulatively considerable netincrease of a criteria pollutant forwhich the Project region is non‐attainment and construction impactswouldbepotentiallysignificant.Withrespect to operations, the Projectwould not result in a cumulativelyconsiderable net increase of anycriteriapollutantforwhichtheProjectregion is non‐attainment andoperational impacts would be lessthansignificant.

SeePDF‐AQ‐1. SeeMitigationMeasureAQ‐1. LessthanSignificantafterMitigation

4.B.4 Substantial PollutantConcentrations

Impact Statement AQ‐4:Constructionof theProjectwouldnotexceedSCAQMDlocalizedsignificancethresholds for NOX and CO at nearbysensitive receptors but wouldpotentially exceed the localizedsignificance threshold for PM10 andPM2.5. OperationoftheProjectwouldnot exceed SCAQMD localized

NotApplicable SeeMitigationMeasureAQ‐1. LessthanSignificantafterMitigation





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancesignificance thresholds at nearbysensitive receptors forNOX, CO,PM10,or PM2.5. Construction and operationof the Project would not result insubstantial emissions of toxic aircontaminants at nearby sensitivereceptors and would not exceedSCAQMD numeric indicators of anincremental increase incancerriskof10 in one million and non‐cancerchronicandacutehealthimpactof1.0.Construction and operation of theProject would not result in trafficcongestion that would cause orcontribute to formation of localizedCOhotspotsthatexceedtheCAAQSorNAAQS. Asa result, constructionandoperation of the Project would notexpose sensitive receptors tosubstantial pollutant concentrations,with the exception of localized PM10and PM2.5 emissions duringconstruction. Thus, localizedemissions of PM10 and PM2.5 duringconstruction would result in apotentiallysignificantimpact.4.B.5 Consistency of the ProjectwithApplicablePlansandPolicies

Impact Statement AQ‐5: Projectuses, including residential, retail, andrestaurant uses, would be consistentwith adopted regulatory policies andguidance regarding air quality.Impactswouldbelessthansignificant.

SeePDF‐AQ‐1. NotApplicable LessthanSignificant

4.C.1CulturalResources–





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceArchaeoloicalandPaleontologicalResources4.C.1.1ArchaeologicalResources Impact Statement ARCH‐1: TheProjectwould involveexcavation intosedimentswherethereispotentialforthe existence of archaeologicalresources below the existing builtenvironment on the Project Site.Therefore, impacts on buriedarchaeological resources areconsideredpotentiallysignificant.

NotApplicable MitigationMeasureARCH‐1: TheApplicant shall retain a qualifiedarchaeological monitor who meets theSecretary of the Interior’s ProfessionalQualifications Standards for anarchaeologist. The monitor shall bepresentduring constructionexcavationssuch as grading, trenching, grubbing, orany other construction excavationactivityassociatedwiththeProject.Thefrequency of monitoring shall bedeterminedbythemonitorbasedontherate of excavation activities, thematerialsbeingexcavated(nativeversusfill sediments), and the depth ofexcavation, and, if found, the proximity,abundance, and type of archaeologicalresourcesencountered.MitigationMeasureARCH‐2: Inthe event that archaeological resourcesareunearthedduringground‐disturbingactivities, the archaeological monitorshall be empowered to halt or redirectground‐disturbing activities away fromthe vicinity of the find so that the findcanbeevaluated.Workshallbeallowedtocontinueoutsideofthevicinityofthefind. All archaeological resourcesunearthed by Project constructionactivities shall be evaluated by thearchaeologist. The Applicant shall






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancecoordinate with the archaeologist andthe City to develop an appropriatetreatment plan for the resources if theyaredeterminedtobepotentiallyeligiblefor theCaliforniaRegisterorpotentiallyqualify as unique archaeologicalresourcespursuanttoCEQA.Treatmentmay include implementation ofarchaeologicaldatarecoveryexcavationsto remove the resource or preservationinplace.MitigationMeasureARCH‐3: Thearchaeological monitor shall prepare afinal report at the conclusion ofarchaeological monitoring. The reportshall be submitted by the Applicant tothe City, the South Central CoastalInformationCenter, and representativesof other appropriate or concernedagencies to signify the satisfactorycompletion of the Project and requiredmitigation measures. The report shallinclude a description of resourcesunearthed, if any, treatment of theresources, and evaluation of theresourceswith respect to the CaliforniaRegister. TheApplicant, in consultationwiththearchaeologistandtheCity,shalldesignate repositories meeting Statestandards in the event thatarchaeological material is recovered.Project material shall be curated inaccordance with the State HistoricalResources Commission’s Guidelines for





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceCurationofArchaeologicalCollections.

Impact Statement ARCH‐2: TheProjectwould involveexcavation intosedimentswherethereispotentialfortheexistenceofhumanremainsbelowthe existing built environment on theProject Site. Therefore, impacts onburiedhumanremainsareconsideredpotentiallysignificant.

NotApplicable MitigationMeasureARCH‐4: Ifhuman remains are encounteredunexpectedlyduring constructionof theProject, State Health and Safety CodeSection 7050.5 requires that no furtherdisturbanceshalloccuruntil theCountyCoronerhasmadethenecessaryfindingsas toorigin anddispositionpursuant toPRCSection5097.98. Iftheremainsaredetermined to be of Native Americandescent, the coroner has 24hours tonotify the Native American HeritageCommission (“NAHC”). TheNAHC shallthenidentifytheperson(s)thoughttobethe Most Likely Descendent (“MLD”).TheMLDmay,withthepermissionoftheApplicant, inspect the site of thediscovery of the Native Americanremainsandmayrecommendmeansfortreating or disposing, with appropriatedignity, the human remains and anyassociated grave goods. TheMLD shallcompletetheirinspectionandmaketheirrecommendation within 48 hours ofbeinggrantedaccessbytheApplicanttoinspect the discovery. Therecommendation may include thescientific removal and nondestructiveanalysis of human remains and itemsassociatedwithNativeAmericanburials.Upon the discovery of the NativeAmerican remains, the Applicant shallensure, according to generally acceptedcultural or archaeological standards orpractices, that the immediate vicinity






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancewhere the Native American humanremains are located is not damaged ordisturbed by further developmentactivityuntiltheApplicanthasdiscussedand conferred, as prescribed in thismitigation measure, with the MLDregarding their recommendations, ifapplicable, taking into account thepossibility of multiple human remains.The Applicant shall discuss allreasonableoptionswiththedescendantsregarding the descendants' preferencesfortreatment.WhenevertheNAHCisunabletoidentifya MLD, or the MLD identified fails tomake a recommendation, or theApplicant or his or her authorizedrepresentative rejects therecommendationofthedescendantsandthe mediation provided for inSubdivision (k) of PRC Section 5097.94,if invoked, fails to provide measuresacceptable to the Applicant, theApplicant or his or her authorizedrepresentative shall inter the humanremains and items associated withNative American human remains withappropriatedignityonthepropertyinalocationnotsubjecttofurtherandfuturesubsurfacedisturbance.





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificance4.C.1.2PaleontologicalResources Impact Statement PALEO‐1: TheProjectwould involveexcavation intosedimentswherethereispotentialforthe existence of paleontologicalresources below the existing builtenvironment on the Project Site.Therefore, impacts on buried uniqueor significant paleontologicalresources are considered potentiallysignificant.

NotApplicable MitigationMeasurePALEO‐1: Aqualified Paleontologist shall attend apre‐grade meeting and develop apaleontological monitoring program forexcavations into older QuaternaryAlluvium deposits. A qualifiedpaleontologist is defined as apaleontologist meeting the criteriaestablishedbytheSocietyforVertebratePaleontology. The qualifiedPaleontologist shall supervise apaleontological monitor who shall bepresentduring constructionexcavationsintoolderQuaternaryAlluviumdeposits.Monitoring shall consist of visuallyinspecting fresh exposures of rock forlarger fossil remains and, whereappropriate, collecting wet or dryscreenedsedimentsamplesofpromisinghorizonsforsmallerfossilremains. Thefrequency of monitoring inspectionsshall be determined by thePaleontologistandshallbebasedontherateofexcavationandgradingactivities,the materials being excavated, and thedepth of excavation, and if found, theabundance and type of fossilsencountered.MitigationMeasurePALEO‐2: If apotential fossil is found, thePaleontologicalMonitorshallbeallowedtotemporarilydivertorredirectgradingand excavation activities in the area of






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancetheexposedfossiltofacilitateevaluationand, if necessary, salvage. At thePaleontologist’sdiscretionandtoreduceany construction delay, the grading andexcavation contractor shall assist inremoving rock samples for initialprocessing.

MitigationMeasurePALEO‐3: Anyfossils encountered and recovered shallbepreparedtothepointofidentificationand cataloguedbefore they aredonatedto their final repository. Any fossilscollected shall be donated to a public,non‐profit institution with a researchinterest in the materials, such as theNaturalHistoryMuseumof LosAngelesCounty.Accompanyingnotes,maps,andphotographs shall also be filed at therepository.Mitigation Measure PALEO‐4:Following the completion of the abovemeasures, the Paleontologist shallprepare a report summarizing theresults of the monitoring and salvagingefforts, the methodology used in theseefforts, as well as a description of thefossils collected and their significance.The report shall be submitted by theProjectApplicanttotheleadagency,theNaturalHistoryMuseumof LosAngelesCounty, and representatives of otherappropriate or concerned agencies tosignifythesatisfactorycompletionofthe





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceProject and required mitigationmeasures.

4.C.1.3CumulativeImpacts Impact Statement ARCH‐3:Cumulativegrowthwouldincreasetheamount of excavation in the Projectvicinityandtherefore thepotential toencounter archaeological resources.However, impacts of the Projectregarding archaeological resourceswould be less than significant withmitigation.RelatedProjectswouldbesubject to regulations and CEQAGuidelinestoavoidadverseeffectsonarchaeological resources. Cumulativeimpactswouldbelessthansignificant.

NotApplicable SeeMitigationMeasureARCH‐1. LessthanSignificantafterMitigation

Impact Statement PALEO‐2:Cumulativegrowthwouldincreasetheamount of excavation in the Projectvicinityandtherefore thepotential toencounter paleontological resources.However, impacts of the Projectregarding paleontological resourceswouldbelessthansignificant.RelatedProjects would be expected toimplement standard mitigationmeasure to avoid adverse effects onpaleontologicalresources.Cumulativeimpactswouldbelessthansignificant.

NotApplicable See Mitigation Measures PALEO‐1throughPALEO‐4.


4.C.2CulturalResources–HistoricalResources

Impact Statement HIST‐1: TheProjectwoulddemolishtheBanksuchthatitwouldberenderedineligibleforthe National Register, California

Notapplicable. Mitigation Measure HIST‐1:Recordation. Prior to demolition andrehabilitation,theprojectapplicantshallprepare a Historic American Buildings

SignificantandUnavoidable.





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceRegister, or as a City Monument.Therefore, Project impacts on theBank structure would be significantandunavoidable.

Survey (HABS) Level II documentationfor the Bank and remaining historicproperty setting, including the parkinglot ramp to the former rooftop of theLytton Center, the staircase and planterfrom the former Lytton Center on thewest side of the Project Site, landscapealong the primary Bank elevation,Bouquet Canyon stone wall extendingfrom the primary Bank elevation to thecorner of Sunset and Havenhurst, andpatioinfrontofthewestBankelevation.The HABS document shall be preparedby a qualified architectural historian,historic architect, or historicpreservation professional who satisfiestheSecretaryoftheInterior’sProfessionalQualification Standards for History,Architectural History, or Architecture,pursuant to 36 CFR61. This documentshall record the history of the propertyand architecture, as well as importanteventsorothersignificantcontributionsto the patterns and trends of historywithwhichthepropertyisassociated,asappropriate. The property’s physicalcondition, both historic and current,shallbedocumented throughsiteplans;historicmaps andphotographs;originalas‐built drawings; large formatphotographs; and written data. Thebuilding exteriors, representativeinterior spaces, character‐definingfeatures, aswell as theproperty settingand contextual views shall bedocumented. Field photographs and





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancenotes shall also be included. Alldocumentation components shall becompleted in accordance with theSecretaryof the Interior’sStandardsandGuidelines for Architectural andEngineering Documentation (HABSstandards). The HABS documentationshall be submitted to the National ParkService for transmittal to the Library ofCongress, and archival copies shall besent to theCity of LosAngelesOffice ofHistoric Resources and Los AngelesPublicLibrary.MitigationMeasureHIST‐2:Relocationof Two Art Works. Pursuant to CEQAand the California Art Preservation Act,the two existing integrated artworks onthe Project Site including RogerDarricarrere’sScreen andDavid Green’sTheFamilyareofrecognizedqualityandshallberelocatedand incorporated intotheProjectdesignorpreservedatanoff‐site location. The familiesof the artistsshall be notified of the extant artworksand every attempt shall be made torelocate the artworks to an appropriatesetting. A relocation plan would beprepared by a qualified professionalconservator and implemented inaccordance with nationally recognizedconservation guidelines including theCode of Ethics and the Guidelines forPractice of the American Institute forConservation of Historic and Artistic





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceWorks.MitigationMeasureHIST‐3:Relocationof Bank. Since retention of the Bank isnot feasible for implementation anddevelopment of the Project, a feasibilitystudy, subject to City review andapproval,shallbepreparedweighingthecosts, advantages, and disadvantages ofrelocation. If the study concludes it isfeasible to relocate the Bank, thestructure’s availability in historicpreservation websites shall beadvertised for a period of not less thanthirty (30) days by the Applicant. Anysuch relocation efforts shall beundertaken in accordance with aRelocation and Rehabilitation Planpreparedbythepartytakingpossessionof the structure to be moved. TheRelocation and Rehabilitation Plan shallbe developed in conjunction with aqualifiedarchitecturalhistorian,historicarchitect, or historic preservationprofessionalwho satisfies the Secretaryof the Interior’s ProfessionalQualifications Standards for History,Architectural History, or Architecture,pursuant to 36 CFR 61. The Plan shallinclude relocation methodologyrecommended by the National ParkService, which are outlined in thebooklet entitled “Moving HistoricBuildings,” by John Obed Curtis (1979).Upon relocation of the structure to thenew site, any maintenance, repair,





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancestabilization, rehabilitation,preservation, conservation, orreconstruction work performed inconjunction with the relocation of thebuildingshallbeundertakeninamannerconsistent with the Secretary of theInterior’sStandards for theTreatmentofHistoric Properties with Guidelines forPreserving,Rehabilitating,Restoring,andReconstructing Historic Properties. TheRelocation and Rehabilitation Plan shallbereviewedandapprovedbytheCityofLosAngelesOfficeofHistoricResourcespriortoitsimplementation.Inaddition,aplaquedescribingthedateofthemoveand theoriginal locationshallbeplacedin a visible location on of the Bank.Relocation shall not takeplaceuntil theBank is first recorded pursuant toMitigationMeasureHIST‐1:Recordation.

Ifafterthree(3)monthsitisevidentthatnoparty is interested in purchasing theBank per the mitigation measurestipulated above, then MitigationMeasures HIST‐1 and HIST‐2 would berequired to document and salvage theimportanthistoryandarchitectureoftheBank.MitigationMeasureHIST‐4:DemolitionMonitoring and Salvage. The projectapplicant shall retain a qualifiedarchitectural historian to conductconstruction monitoring during





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancedemolition. Any important historicfabric associated with the period ofsignificance from 1959‐1969, shall befully recorded in photographic imagesandwrittenmanuscript notes. Prior tothe commencement of demolition,significantmaterialsuchastheconcrete‐folded plate roof shall be inventoriedand evaluated for potential salvage,analysis and interpretation. A qualifiedarchitectural historian or historicpreservation professional who satisfiesthe Secretary of the Interior’sProfessional Qualification Standards forArchitectural History, pursuant to 36CFR 61, shall prepare the necessarywrittenandillustrateddocumentationina construction monitoring and salvagereport. This document shall record thehistoryoftheBank’sreinforcedconcreteconstructionmethodsduring theperiodof significance as well document itspresent physical condition through siteplans; historic maps and photographs;sketch maps; digital photography; andwrittendataandtext.Alldocumentationcomponents shall be completed inaccordance with the Secretary of theInterior’s Standards and forArchaeologicalDocumentationforaboveground structures. The completeddocumentationshallbeplacedon fileatthe South Central Coastal InformationCenter, California State University,Fullerton,CA;andtheCityofLosAngelesPublic Library. Findings shall be





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceincorporated into the HABS report (seeMitigationMeasureHIST‐1above).

Impact Statement HIST‐2: Directimpacts of new construction onhistoric resources within the ProjectSite would be significant andunavoidable due to the demolition ofthe Bank. Indirect impactswould beless than significant as the Projectwould not reduce the integrity orsignificance of important historicalresourcesintheProjectvicinity.

Notapplicable. SeeMitigationMeasuresHIST‐1throughHIST‐4.

Directimpacts:SignificantandUnavoidable.Indirectimpacts:LessthanSignificant.

4.DGeologyandSoils 4.D.1GeologicHazards Impact Statement GS‐1:Implementation of the Project couldresult in significant risks to life orpropertygiven theseismicconditionsat the Project Site. While impactsregarding surface fault rupture,liquefaction,landslides,andexpansivesoils would be less than significantgiven compliance with applicablebuilding codes and seismic designstandards, impacts associated withseismic ground shaking andtemporary excavations and sitestability would be potentiallysignificant.

Notapplicable. MitigationMeasureGS‐1: Prior toissuanceofagradingpermit,aqualifiedgeotechnical engineer shall prepare andsubmit to the Department of Buildingand Safety a final Geotechnical Reportthat provides recommendations toaddress seismic safety and designrequirements for foundations, retainingwalls/shoring, and excavation. Aqualified geotechnical engineer shall beretained by the Applicant to be presenton the Project Site during excavation,grading, and general site preparationactivitiestomonitortheimplementationoftherecommendationsspecified intheGeotechnical Report as well as otherrecommendations made in subsequentGeotechnical Reports prepared for theproject subject to City review andapproval. When/if needed, thegeotechnical engineer shall provide






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancestructure‐specific geologic andgeotechnical recommendations whichshall be documented in a report to beapproved by the City and appended tothe project’s previous GeotechnicalReports.

4.D.2SedimentationandErosion Impact Statement GS‐2:Implementation of the Project wouldnot result in substantial erosion orsedimentation given compliance withapplicable regulations. Therefore,impacts regarding geologic hazardswouldbelessthansignificant.

Notapplicable. Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. LessthanSignificant

4.D.3LandformAlteration ImpactStatementGS‐3: TheProjectSiteiscurrentlycompletelydevelopedwithurbanusesanddoesnotcontainany distinct or prominent geologic ortopographic features that could bedestroyed, permanently covered, ormateriallyandadverselymodifiedasaresult of the Project. Therefore, noimpactsregardinglandformalterationwould result from Projectimplementation.

Notapplicable. Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. LessthanSignificant

4.EGreenhouseGasEmissions 4.E.1GreenhouseGasEmissions Impact Statement GHG‐1:Construction and operation of theProject would not generate a netincrease in annual GHG emissions,either directly or indirectly, in excessof the draft SCAQMDTier 3 indicator

SeePDF‐AQ‐1. Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. LessthanSignificant





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceof significance. As a result,construction and operation of theProjectwouldgenerateGHGemissionsthatwouldhavealessthansignificantimpactontheenvironment.4.E.2 Greenhouse Gas ReductionPlans

Impact Statement GHG‐2:Construction and operation of theProject would not conflict withapplicable GHG emissions reductionsplans, policies, or regulations. As aresult, construction and operation ofthe Project would not have asignificance impact with respect toconsistencywithGHGreductionplansand impacts would be less thansignificant.

SeePDF‐AQ‐1. Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. LessthanSignificant

4.FLandUse 4.F.1 Consistency of the ProposedProject with Applicable Plans andPolicies

ImpactStatementLU‐1:TheProject,including land use, density, and FARwould be consistent with adoptedregulatory policies and guidancegoverning the relationship betweenland uses in the Project vicinity.Impactswouldbelessthansignificant.

Notapplicable. Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. LessthanSignificant.

4.F.2LandUseCompatibility ImpactStatementLU‐2: TheProjectwouldbegenerallyconsistentwiththeexisting pattern of development onSunsetBoulevardinwhichresidential






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceuses are juxtaposed to commercialuses located along Sunset Boulevardin the City of Los Angeles and theadjacentCityofWestHollywood.TheProject would not alter existing landuse patterns or cause a long‐termchange in the neighborhood throughdisruption, division, or isolation.Impactswouldbelessthansignificant.4.GNoise 4.G.1Construction Impact Statement Noise‐1: On‐siteconstructionnoiseassociatedwiththeProject would expose nearbyresidential uses to noise levels inexcess of established thresholds.Therefore, impacts would beconsidered potentially significant.However, mitigation measures areprovidedtoaddressthisimpact.

PDF‐Noise‐1,Theprojectcontractor(s)wouldequipallconstructionequipment,fixedormobile,withproperlyoperatingandmaintainednoisemufflers,consistentwithmanufacturers’standards.

MitigationMeasureNoise‐1: Temporary noise barriers shall be usedto block the line‐of‐site betweenconstruction equipment and noise‐sensitive receptors during projectconstruction,asfollows:

Provide a temporary 15‐foot tallnoise barrier along the easternboundary of the Projectconstruction site to reduceconstruction noise at the multi‐family residential uses alongCrescent Heights Boulevard(LocationR3).

Provide a temporary 15‐foot tallnoise barrier along the southernand western boundaries of theProject construction site to reduceconstruction noise at the multi‐family residential uses alongHavenhurstDrive(LocationR4).

Provide a temporary 15‐foot tall

LessthanSignificantafterMitigation.





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancenoise barrier along the northernboundary of the Projectconstruction site to reduceconstruction noise at the single‐familyresidentialusesalongSelmaAvenue(LocationR5).

MitigationMeasureNoise‐2:Construction activities which have thepotential to produce substantialvibration shall be scheduled so as toallowonly onepiece of such equipmentto operate within 50 feet of the multi‐family residential uses along thesouthernboundaryoftheProjectSite.

Impact Statement Noise‐2: Off‐siteconstruction traffic would notincrease ambient noise levels atresidential uses along the haul routeby5dBAormore.Therefore,impactswouldbelessthansignificant.


4.G.2Operation Impact Statement Noise‐3: Projectimplementationwould increase noiselevels at adjacent noise‐sensitivereceptors in the Project area.However, Project‐relatednoisewouldnotexceedestablishedthresholdsandtherefore impactswould be less thansignificant.


Impact Statement Noise‐4: Projectimplementationwould increase noiselevels at adjacent noise‐sensitivereceptors in the Project vicinity.However, Project‐related noise

PDF‐Noise‐2,Exterioramplifiedmusicfromtheeventareas(i.e.SunsetTerrace,RooftopLoungeTerrace,etc.)shallbelimitedtoamaximumsoundlevelof86dBAat

Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. LessthanSignificant.





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancegeneration would not exceedestablished thresholds, thereforeimpactswouldbelessthansignificant.

approximately25feetfromtheeventareaboundaries.Thebusinessoperator(s)and/oreventcoordinatorsshallensurethatsoundequipmentiscalibratedsemi‐annually.PDF‐Noise‐3,ExterioramplifiedmusicfromtheeventareasofInternalPatiosandCentralPlazashallbelimitedtoamaximumsoundlevelof80dBAatapproximately10feetfromtheeventareaboundaries.Thebusinessoperator(s)and/oreventcoordinatorsshallensurethatsoundequipmentiscalibratedsemi‐annually.

Impact Statement Noise‐5: Projectimplementation would not increasenoise levels associated with theparking structure at adjacent noise‐sensitivereceptorsintheProjectareaabove existing ambient noise levels.Therefore,impactswouldbelessthansignificant.


Impact Statement Noise‐6:Proposed residential uses would notbe exposed to significant noiseimpacts with implementation ofRegulatoryMeasure‐Noise‐3.


4.G.3Vibration Impact Statement Noise‐7:Constructionactivitieswouldresultinsporadic, temporary vibration effectsadjacent to the Project Site, which

Notapplicable. Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. SignificantandUnavoidable.





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancewould exceed established thresholds.Thus, construction vibration impactswouldbepotentiallysignificant.Impact Statement Noise‐8: Projectoperation would not generateexcessive vibration levels at nearbysensitive receptor locations. Thus,long‐termvibrationimpactswouldbeless than significant. However,temporary construction‐relatedvibration would exceed establishedthresholds, and therefore impacts inthis regard would be significant andunavoidable.

Notapplicable. Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. SignificantandUnavoidable.

4.HPopulation,Housing,andEmployment

4.H.1Construction Impact Statement PH‐1: TheProject’s construction phase wouldhave no impact on the supply ofhousing units or population growth.Construction activities would creatework for an estimated 200construction workers at any giventime during project construction.Constructionworkerswouldbedrawnfromaregionalpoolofworkers. Theshort‐termemploymentopportunitieswould contribute to the local andregional economy. Impacts ofconstruction activity would be lessthansignificant.


4.H.2Operation ImpactStatementPH‐2:TheProjectwould create new housing units and






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancegenerateanewresidentialpopulation,aswell as generate new employmentopportunities. This isconsistentwithSCAG’s short‐term and long‐termgrowthprojectionsfortheCommunityPlanareaandtheCityofLosAngeles,and helps the City meet its housingobligation under the SCAG RHNAallocation. Impacts regarding therelationship of the Project to SCAGgrowthprojectionswouldbelessthansignificant.ImpactStatementPH‐3:TheProjectrepresents a mixed‐use developmentthat would add residential, andcommercial retail and restaurantsuses to a developed area within theHollywoodCommunityPlanarea.Thetypes and amounts of developmentwouldbewithintherangeanticipatedin applicable policies and growthprojections. The Project alsorepresents infill development thatsupports the development ofincreased population density outsideof existing neighborhoods andenhanced retail services to serveexisting nearby population.Therefore, impacts regardingconsistency with the regulatoryframework would be less thansignificant.


Cumulative ImpactStatementPH‐4:Therelatedprojects considered in the analysis of






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancecumulative development includedevelopment in the Project vicinitywithin the Hollywood CommunityPlanarea.Cumulativepopulationandhousing increases represented by therelated projects combined with theproposed Project are within SCAG’sgrowthprojections for theHollywoodCommunityPlanareaandtheCityasawhole for thePlan’splanninghorizonand would not result in cumulativelysignificant impacts with respect togrowth in these areas. The Project’sincremental contribution to growthwould be less than cumulativelyconsiderable,andthereforewouldnotcontribute to a cumulativelysignificant impact with respect togrowthprojections.4.I.1PublicServices–FireProtectionandEmergencyMedicalServices

Impact Statement Fire‐1: TheProjectwouldnotrequiretheadditionofanewfirestationortheexpansion,consolidation, or relocation of anexisting fire station to maintainservice due to compliance with StateandCityregulatoryrequirementsandguidelines that address emergencyresponsetimes,emergencyaccess,fireflow, and fire safety as well as theimplementation of MitigationMeasuresandProjectDesignFeaturesrelated to traffic management.

Notapplicable. SeeMitigationMeasuresTR‐1andTR‐2. LessthanSignificantafterMitigation.





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceImpactswouldbelessthansignificant.4.I.2PublicServices–PoliceProtection

Impact Statement POL‐1: TheProjectwouldnotrequiretheadditionof a new police facility or theexpansion,consolidation,orrelocationof an existing police facility tomaintain service due to compliancewith State and City regulatoryrequirements as well as theimplementation of project designfeatures related to trafficmanagement. Impacts would be lessthansignificant.

Notapplicable. Mitigation Measure POL‐1: Prior toissuanceofbuildingpermits, theProjectapplicant shall consult with the LAPDCrime Prevention Unit regardingincorporation of CPTED techniques intothe Project design in order tominimizepotential criminal activity at theProjectSite.


4.I.3PublicServices–ParksandRecreation

ConstructionImpacts Impact Statement PRK‐1: Impactsduetoconstructionwouldbelessthansignificant. Therearenoparks inthevicinityof theProject Site thatwouldbe physically affected by Projectconstruction.


OperationalImpacts Impact Statement PRK‐2: TheProject would add new residentialpopulation to the Project area,whichwould increase the demand for parkservices. The Project would includerecreation amenities that wouldreduce the use of parks by residents,but would not meet the City’s long‐range standard of ten acres of

Notapplicable. Mitigation Measure PRK‐1: In theeventthattheProject’samenitiesdonotprovide sufficient credit against theProject’s land dedication and/or in lieufee requirement, the Applicant shall doone or more of the following: (1)dedicateadditionalparklandtomeettherequirements of Los Angeles MunicipalCode Section 17.12; (2) pay in‐lieu fees






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceparkland per 1,000 residents or theshort‐rangestandardoftwoacresper1,000 residents. The Project’srecreational amenities would notsatisfy the PRP’s short‐ or long‐rangeparkland provision standards, andthus impacts would be consideredpotentiallysignificant.

for any land dedication requirementshortfall; or (3) provide on‐siteimprovements equivalent in value tosaidin‐lieufees.

Impact Statement PRK‐3: Impactswould be less than significant. TheProject’s on‐site facilities would belocated within the building envelopeof the Project generally, as analyzedelsewhere in this Draft EIR. TheProject does not include off‐site parkfacilities.


Cumulative Impact Statement PRK‐4: TheProject in combination with relatedprojects would add new residentialpopulation to the Project area,whichwould increase the demand for parkservices. However, these relatedProjects would be required complywith LAMC requirements or similarrequirements of the City of WestHollywood. Compliance withapplicable mitigation measures andapplicable City of West Hollywoodrequirements would reducecumulative impacts to parks andrecreational facilities to less thansignificant.

Notapplicable. SeeMitigationMeasurePRK‐1.


4.I.4PublicServices–Libraries ImpactStatementLIB‐1:TheProject Notapplicable. Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. LessthanSignificant.





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancecould add new residential populationto the Project area, which wouldincrease the demand for libraryservices. However, there is sufficientcapacitytoaccommodatethatdemandwithin the existing public librariesserving the Project. In addition, theProject proposes an on‐site 1,140‐square‐foot library that would be forthe sole use of Project residents.Compliance with the prescribedmitigation measure would furtherreduce impacts on library services tolessthansignificant.Cumulative ImpactStatementLIB‐2:Cumulativegrowth in the Project area wouldincrease the number of people usinglibraryservices.TheProject’snetnewresidential populations wouldrepresent relatively small incrementsofincreaseddemandatlocallibraries.The existing libraries serving theProject are anticipated to be able toaccommodate the increasedcumulative growth in population.When considered together withrelated projects in the same libraryservicearea,theProject’sincrementalcontribution to impacts on libraryservices would be less thancumulatively considerable andcumulativeimpactsonlibrarieswouldthereforebelessthansignificant.


4.JTransportationandCirculation





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceConstructionImpacts ImpactStatementTR‐1: TheProjectwould not cause substantial delaysanddisruptionofexistingtraffic flow,result in impacts based on theoperational thresholds atintersections during peak periods,require temporary relocation ofexisting bus stops to more than one‐quartermilefromtheirexistingstops,orresult inthesubstantial lossofon‐street parking such that the parkingneedsoftheprojectareawouldnotbemet. As such, construction‐relatedtraffic and parking impacts would beconsideredlessthansignificantforallconstruction phases except theshoring and excavation phase.Temporary construction trafficimpacts would be consideredpotentially significant during off‐peakhours throughout the shoring andexcavationphaseofconstruction.

Notapplicable. Nofeasiblemitigationmeasuresareavailablethatcouldreducethesignificanceofconstruction‐relatedtrafficimpactsduringtheshoringandexcavationphase.

SignificantandUnavoidable.

IntersectionImpacts Impact Statement TR‐2A and TR‐2B: The Project would result in asignificant impact at the unsignalizedintersection of FountainAvenue/Havenhurst Drive in the P.M.peak hour in the City of WestHollywoodintheExisting(Year2013)With Project and Future (Year 2018)With Project scenarios. As such,impacts to intersections would beconsideredpotentiallysignificant.

Notapplicable. MitigationMeasureTR‐1:TheapplicantshallinstallanewtrafficsignalatFountainAvenue/HavenhurstDrive.Thenewsignalshallbeasimple,two‐phasesignal(oneforFountainAvenuetrafficandoneforHavenhurstDrivetraffic).ThesignalshallbefullyactuatedsoastominimizedisruptiontoFountainAvenuethroughtrafficflows,butprovidea“green”indicationforbothnorthboundandsouthboundHavenhurst






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceDrivewhentrafficononeorbothofthoseapproachesbeginstoexhibitunacceptabledelaysduetohighvolumesand/orlimitedgapsinFountainAvenuetraffic,particularlyduringtheA.M.andP.M.peaktrafficperiods.

ImpactsonNeighborhoodStreets ImpactStatementTR‐3: TheProjectwould result ina less thansignificantimpactonthefourroadwaysegmentsanalyzed in the TIA in the Existing(Year 2013)With Project and Future(Year 2018) With Project scenarios.Therefore,nomitigationmeasuresarenecessary.


RegionalTrafficAnalysis Impact Statement TR‐4: Project‐generated traffic would be below theCMP’s 50‐trip threshold at the CMPintersections. In addition, theProject’stripadditionstoanysegmentof theUS‐101would be less than theCMP’s 150‐trip threshold. Therefore,no further analysis is necessary andno significant impact to regionalfacilitieswouldoccur.

Notapplicable. Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. Noimpact.

PublicTransit ImpactStatementTR‐5: TheProjectwould have a nominal increase intransit ridership. Therefore, transit‐relatedimpactstoexistingbusservicewouldbelessthansignificant.


Access ImpactStatementTR‐6: TheProject Notapplicable. Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. LessthanSignificant.





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceoperational characteristics, expectedminimumdrivewaycapacities,andtheprojected peak hour driveway trafficvolumesof theProjectwouldprovideadequate capacity to accommodatethe anticipated maximum vehiculardemandsforbothenteringandexitingtraffic at each of the driveways. Inaddition,thedrivewayswouldprovidesufficient queuing. Therefore, theProject would result in a less thansignificant impact with regard toaccess.Parking ImpactStatementTR‐7: TheProjectwould provide 849 vehicular parkingspaces, including554commercialand295residentialparkingspaces,whichwould exceed the adjusted requiredparkingby60spaces.Inaddition,theProject would provide a total of 985bicycle spaces, which would exceedthe LAMC bicycle parkingrequirements. Therefore, nosignificant parking impact wouldoccur.


Pedestrian and Bicycle Access andSafety

Impact Statement TR‐8: Thedriveways would not result inconflictswithbicycles or pedestrians.Therefore,nosignificantimpactwouldoccur. However, the on‐street valetdrop‐off turnout lane could result inconflicts with vehicular, bicycle or

Notapplicable. MitigationMeasureTR‐2:Theon‐streetvaletdrop‐offturnoutlaneshallberestrictedtoright‐turnentryonlyfromsouthboundCrescentHeightsBoulevard(noleft‐turnentryfromnorthboundCrescentHeightsBoulevard).






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificancepedestrian traffic if all turnmovements are allowed. As such,impacts related to the on‐street valetdrop‐off would be consideredpotentiallysignificant.Consistency with RegulatoryFramework

ImpactStatementTR‐9: TheProjectwouldsupporttheCommunityPlaninthat theProjectwouldnothinder theCity’s efforts to provide a circulationsystem coordinated with land usesand densities and adequate toaccommodate traffic. The Projectwould also be consistent withapplicable regional plans related totransportation.Therefore,theProjectwould not conflict with theimplementation of adoptedtransportation programs, plans, andpolicies and a less than significantimpactwouldoccur.


4.K.1UtilitiesandServiceSystems–WaterSupply

Impact Statement WS‐1: Waterdemandduringconstructionwouldbeminimalandoffsetbythereductioninwaterconsumptionfromexistinguses.WaterdemandduringoperationoftheProject would not exceed availablewatersupplies.Inaddition,thewaterdistributioncapacitywithappropriateinfrastructure improvements wouldbe sufficient to serve the Project.Therefore, the Project would have a






EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceless than significant impact on watersupplyandinfrastructure.4.K.2UtilitiesandServiceSystems–Wastewater

Construction Impact Statement WW‐1A: TheProject would generate a negligibleamount of wastewater duringconstruction. Therefore, constructionimpactsonwastewaterwouldbe lessthansignificant.


Operation Impact Statement WW‐1B: TheProjectwouldgeneratean increase inwastewater that could beaccommodatedintheexistingsystem.Theexistingwastewatersystemisnotconstrainedoratcapacityandthereissufficient capacity to accommodatethe Project. Therefore, impacts onwastewater during operation wouldbelessthansignificant.


Impact Statement WW‐2: TheProject would not generatewastewater flows in an amount thatwould substantially or incrementallyexceed the future scheduled capacityof thesystem. Therefore,wastewaterimpacts during operation would belessthansignificant.


4.K.3UtilitiesandServiceSystems–SolidWaste

Construction Impact Statement SW‐1A: The Notapplicable. Nomitigationmeasuresarerequired. LessthanSignificant.





EnvironmentalImpacts ProjectDesignFeatures(PDF‐) MitigationMeasures(MM‐) LevelofSignificanceProject would generate constructiondebris due to removal of the existingbuildings, parking lot paving,excavation, and construction of newbuildings. Construction anddemolition waste would be disposedof at an inert disposal facility, whichhas sufficient capacity. Therefore,construction impacts on solid wastewouldbelessthansignificantOperation Impact Statement SW‐1B: TheProjectwouldgeneratesolidwasteasthe result of operation of theresidential and retail uses thatwouldoccurontheProjectSite. TheProjectwouldcomplywithCityrequirementsregardingwaste,suchastheprovisionof space for recycling. With the CityandCounty’songoingeffortstoreducethe amount of waste disposed of atClass III landfills, the Project wouldnot exceed the permitted capacity ofthe facilities serving the Project.Therefore, impacts onwaste disposalfacilities would be less thansignificant.


ImpactStatementSW‐2:TheProjectwould be implemented pursuant toapplicable requirements that wouldfurther City objectives regardingdiversionofsolidwastefromlandfillsand efficient use of County landfillfacilities.Thus, impactswouldbe lessthansignificant.


0. exec summary - la city planning · executive summary november 2014 city of los angeles 8150...

Documents