DOCSLIB.ORG

3003 Runyon Canyon Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
3003 Runyon Canyon Project 3003 Runyon Canyon Project Case Number: ENV-2016-4180-EIR Project Location: 3003 N. Runyon Canyon Road, Los Angeles, California, 90046 Community Plan Area: Hollywood Council District: 4—David Ryu Project Description: The Project proposes the construction of a multi-level, single-family residential structure along the western side of a ridge on the Project Site. The irregular-shaped Project Site is located within the Runyon Canyon Park area of the City and is approximately 0.5 miles south of Mulholland Drive in the Hollywood Hills. The Project Site is west of US Highway 101 and the Hollywood Bowl. The total area of the Project Site is 197,435 square feet. The Project Site contains the existing single-family residence known as the Headley/Handley House. The Headley/Handley House was designated a Los Angeles Historic-Cultural Monument (HCM) #563 on July 14, 1992; therefore, the Headley/Handley House is a “historical resource” pursuant to CEQA and subject to the provisions of the City of Los Angeles Historic Preservation Ordinance. The proposed building would include a basement, first floor area, and second floor area totaling roughly 11,284 square feet in size. There would also be an attached four-car garage. The existing historical structure would remain intact (i.e., the Headley/Handley House). As part of the Project, the owner is requesting that the existing structure be reclassified as a “guest house,” with kitchen, but no physical changes would be made to that structure as part of the Project. The new primary residence would become the primary building on the Project Site. Vehicular access to the Project would be provided via a driveway along North Runyon Canyon Road. PREPARED FOR: The City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning PREPARED BY: CAJA Environmental Services, LLC APPLICANT: Manuel Valencia April 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Initial Study Page Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................IS-1 Project Description ........................................................................................................... A-1 A. Project Summary ...............................................................................................A-1 B. Environmental Setting ........................................................................................A-1 C. Project Description .............................................................................................A-5 D. CEQA Guidelines Appendix F ...........................................................................A-6 E. Project Construction and Scheduling .................................................................A-8 F. Requested Permits and Approvals ....................................................................A-8 Environmental Checklist .................................................................................................. B-1 I. Aesthetics ..........................................................................................................B-1 II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources ..................................................................B-5 III. Air Quality ..........................................................................................................B-7 IV. Biological Resources .......................................................................................B-15 V. Cultural Resources ..........................................................................................B-18 VI. Geology and Soils ............................................................................................B-23 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................B-27 VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................................B-28 IX. Hydrology and Water Quality ...........................................................................B-34 3003 Runyon Canyon Project i City of Los Angeles Initial Study – Table of Contents April 2018 X. Land Use and Planning ...................................................................................B-39 XI. Mineral Resources ...........................................................................................B-41 XII. Noise ...............................................................................................................B-42 XIII. Population and Housing ...................................................................................B-45 XIV. Public Services ................................................................................................B-46 XV. Recreation .......................................................................................................B-50 XVI. Transportation and Traffic ................................................................................B-51 XVII. Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................B-54 XVIII. Utilities and Service Systems ..........................................................................B-56 XVIX. Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................................B-61 List of Figures 1 Vicinity Map .............................................................................................................A-3 2 Aerial Map. ...............................................................................................................A-4 3 Proposed Site Plan ..................................................................................................A-7 List of Tables 1 Estimated Construction Schedule ............................................................................A-8 2 Estimated Daily Operations Emissions, Existing Use ..............................................B-8 3 Extimated Daily Construction Emissions - Unmitigated ............................................ B-10 4 Estimated Daily Operations Emissions - Unmitigated ............................................B-11 Appendices A – Air Quality Modeling B – Tree Report C – Historic Report 3003 RUNYON CANYON PROJECT ii City of Los Angeles Initial Study – Table of Contents April 2018 INITIAL STUDY Executive Summary Project Title: 3003 Runyon Canyon Project Environmental Case Number: ENV-2016-4180-EIR Related Cases: APCSV-2016-4179-SPE-DRB-SPP-MSP-ZV-ZAD Project Location: 3003 North Runyon Canyon Road, Los Angeles 90046 Community Plan Area: Hollywood Council District: 4 Lead City Agency: City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning Staff Contact Name and Address: Erin Strelich, 200 N. Spring Street, Rm. 750, (After April 6: 221 S. Figueroa, Suite 1350) Los Angeles, CA 90012 Phone Number: (213) 978-1351 until April 6, then (213) 847-3626 Applicant Name and Address: Manuel Valencia, 3003 N. Runyon Canyon Road, Los Angeles, CA 90046 Phone Number: (818) 591-9309 General Plan designation: Minimum Residential Zoning: RE-40-1-H (Residential Estate, Hillside Ordinance) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Project proposes the construction of a multi-level, single-family residential structure along the western side of a ridge on the Project Site. The irregular-shaped Project Site is located within the Runyon Canyon Park area of the City and is approximately 0.5 miles south of Mulholland Drive in the Hollywood Hills. The Project Site is west of US Highway 101 and the Hollywood Bowl. The total area of the Project Site is 197,435 square feet. The Project Site contains the existing single-family residence known as the Headley/Handley House. The Headley/Handley House was designated a Los Angeles Historic-Cultural Monument (HCM) #563 on July 14, 1992; therefore, the Headley/Handley House is a “historical resource” pursuant to CEQA and subject to the provisions of the City of Los Angeles Historic Preservation Ordinance. The proposed building would include a basement, first floor area, and second floor area totaling roughly 11,284 square feet in size. There would also be an attached four-car garage. The existing historical structure would remain intact (i.e., the Headley/Handley House). As part of the Project, the owner is requesting that the existing structure be reclassified as a “guest house,” with kitchen, but no physical changes would be made to that structure as part of the Project. The new primary residence would become the primary building on the Project Site. Vehicular access to the Project would be provided via a driveway along North Runyon Canyon Road. (For additional detail, see “Part A – Project Description”). 3003 RUNYON CANYON PROJECT IS-1 City of Los Angeles Initial Study – Executive Summary April 2018 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The Project Site is located 3003 North Runyon Canyon Road, in the Hollywood Community Plan area (HCP) of the City of Los Angeles (City). The irregular shaped Site is located within the Runyon Canyon Park area of the City, approximately 0.5 miles south of Mulholland Drive and west of US Highway 101 and the Hollywood Bowl landmark in the Hollywood Hills. The total area that composes the Project Site is 197,435 square feet. The Site is zoned RE-40-1-H (Residential Estate, Hillside Ordinance) with a General Plan land use designation of Minimum Residential. The Project Site is located within an Equine Keeping area of the City. The Project Site is also located within the Outer Corridor of the Mulholland Scenic Parkway Specific Plan (MSPSP) area, which is defined as the area between 500-feet and one-half mile from the right-of-way along Mulholland
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annotated Checklist of Birds of Griffith Park
    Annotated Checklist of Birds of Griffith Park April 2007 Last updated August 15, 2007 Daniel S. Cooper (DSC) Cooper Ecological Monitoring, Inc. 15 So. Raymond Ave., 2nd Fl. Pasadena, CA 91105 [email protected] [ ] = Los Angeles River portion only * = breeding confirmed (c. 50 species) *? = breeding suspected (17 species) Three-letter acronyms (e.g. BUR, HOL) are local atlas blocks based on USGS topographic maps used by the Los Angeles County Breeding Bird Survey. Regularly-occurring (151) [Canada Goose Branta canadensis] Non-breeding (?) resident along vegetated portions of the Los Angeles River. [Wood Duck Aix sponsa] Winter resident along vegetated portions of the Los Angeles River. [Gadwall Anas strepera] Winter resident along vegetated portions of the Los Angeles River. [American Wigeon Anas americana] Winter resident along vegetated portions of the Los Angeles River. [*Mallard Anas platyrhynchos] Breeding resident, mainly along vegetated portions of the Los Angeles River. Ducklings noted vic. Los Feliz Blvd. on 10 May 2007 (DSC). [Blue-winged Teal Anas discors] Winter resident along vegetated portions of the Los Angeles River. [*Cinnamon Teal Anas cyanoptera] Breeding resident in small numbers along vegetated portions of the Los Angeles River. Nesting records include fledglings on 07 July 1995 and on 19 July 1999 (both LACBBA); copulating pair just north of Los Feliz Blvd. on 11 May 2007. [Northern Shoveler Anas clypeata] Winter resident along vegetated portions of the Los Angeles River. [Northern Pintail Anas acuta] Winter resident along vegetated portions of the Los Angeles River. [Green-winged Teal Anas crecca] Winter resident along vegetated portions of the Los Angeles River. [Ring-necked Duck Aythya collaris] Winter resident along vegetated portions of the Los Angeles River.
    [Show full text]
  • Dam Safety Legislation in California
    Brief Overview of DAM SAFETY LEGISLATION IN CALIFORNIA J. David Rogers, Ph.D., P.E., P.G. Karl F. Hasselmann Chair in Geological Engineering Missouri University of Science & Technology DAM SAFETY LEGISLATION • In 1915 the State legislature passed a law requiring all plans for dams and reservoirs to be submitted to the State Engineer for approval,but the act provided no penalty for failure to comply. • Following a 2-year study, in August 1916 the State Reclamation Board issued a report recommending that the State Engineer regulate all storage reservoirs. • No further action was taken by the legislature until after January 1916 floods in Southern California FLOOD OF JANUARY 1916 • Sweetwater Dam was raised 15 feet in 1910-11, increasing the reservoir capacity by 70% (designed by James D. Schuyler). • In January 1916, 8 to 20 inches of rain fell on the area, causing a peak discharge of 45,500 cfs for an hour, and an average flow of 20,000 cfs over 24 hours. The dam was overtopped to a depth of 3.66 feet, washing out the south abutment dike (shown here). 8 people were killed by the flooding. We would never build an arch dam in such fractured rock today. LOWER OTAY DAM FAILURE (1916) View from just downstream of the dam View from upstream of the dam site • On January 27, 1916 the Lower Otay Reservoir rose 9.5 ft between 7AM and 5 PM, when the flow began to overtop the dam • When the overflow reached 3,500 cfs it triggered severe erosion of the dam, causing it to fail within 5 minutes.
    [Show full text]
  • 4Ppwqved May 1 7 2010 Report of General Manager No 10-124
    4PPWQVED MAY 1 7 2010 REPORT OF GENERAL MANAGER NO 10-124 6flAAD OF RECREAT4ON DATE May 17, 2010 PARK COMMISSONmS C.D. 4 BOARD OF RECREATION AND PARK COMMISSIONERS SUBJECT: CAHUENGA PEAK/HOLLYWOOD SIGN - PROPERTY SALE AND GIFT AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISITION OF 138 ACRES ADJACENT TO THE HOLLYWOOD SIGN IN GRIFFITH PARK R. Adams F. Mok V. Israel K. Regan H. Fujita *M.Sh I S. Huntley Approved i Disapproved RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board: 1. Adopt the Resolution, substantially in the form on file in the Board Office, authorizing staff to request the assistance of the Department of General Services and other City entities, per Charter Section 594 (a) and (b), in obtaining fee simple title to a privately owned, 138 acre vacant parcel adjacent to Griffith Park in the Hollywood area of the City of Los Angeles (Assessor Parcel Numbers 5577-008-00 1, 002; 558 1-0 10-00 1,002; and 558 1-005-001), and; 2. Approve the Property Sale and Gift Agreement (PSGA), substantially in the form on file in the Board Office, subject to the approval of the City Attorney as to form, and; 3. Direct the Board Secretary to transmit forthwith the proposed PSGA to the City Attorney for review and approval as to form, and; 4. Authorize the Department's Chief Accounting Employee to establish the necessary accounts to acquire the project site, and to transfer the necessary monies to fund the acquisition to the appropriate City Department or escrow company account in order to expeditiously effectuate the acquisition of the Cahuenga Peak site; and; 5.
    [Show full text]
  • City Guide of Hollywood and the Hills
    HIKES/WALKS HOLLYWOOD SIGN for a leisurely walk or a run. The famous Hollywood sign is a Never crowded, it offers views cultural icon located on Mount Lee of the Hollywood Sign that are in the Hollywood Hills. It was creat- second to none. CITY GUIDE TO ed in 1923 as an advertisement for a local real estate development and RUNYON CANYON originally spelled “Hollywoodland.” (1.8 MILES TO TRAILHEAD) HOLLYWOOD Hike to the top of the sign and take 2000 N Fuller Ave in breathtaking 360° views of LA. Runyon Canyon is a system of easy to challenging trails with expansive Mt Hollywood Trail views of LA along the way. The THE HILLS 3 MILES (EASY) people watching can be just as and Canyon Drive Trail intriguing as the workout these 6.5 MILES (MODERATE) trails provide. Dogs are welcome! Cahuenga Peak Hike 3 MILES (DIFFICULT) Beachwood Canyon GRIFFITH OBSERVATORY Stairs Map (3.8 MILES) 2800 E Observatory Rd Sitting on the south-facing slope of Mount Hollywood in Griffith Park, the Griffith Observatory is a popular tourist attraction with an excellent view of the Holly- wood Sign and an extensive array of space and science-related displays. Admission has been free since it opened in 1935. BEACHWOOD CANYON STAIRS HOLLYWOOD RESERVOIR (2.6 MILES) (1.5 MILES) Start: 2800 Beachwood Dr The reservoir was created in 1924 This is a vigorous hike through with the construction of Mulholland Hollywood history, utilizing some Dam. The trail around the reservoir, of the steepest and most also known as Lake Hollywood, is charming staircases in the city, completely flat as opposed to a and affording breathtaking views hike, making it the perfect place from Downtown to the sea.
    [Show full text]
  • When Mountain Lions Are Neighbors Beth Pratt
    WHEN MOUNTAIN LIONS ARE NEIGHBORS WILDLIFE IN TODAY’S CALIFORNIA BETH PRATT © 2014 National Wildlife Federation. All rights reserved. Book Contents ABOUT THE BOOK This is an early preview of a chapter—still in draft—from the upcoming book When Mountain Lions Are Neighbors: Wildlife in Today’s California, written Chapter 1: A Mountain Lion in Hollywoodland: Can People and by National Wildlife Federation’s California Director, Beth Pratt. The book, Wildlife Coexist in the Second Largest City in the Nation? to be released in the fall of 2015 by the award-winning publisher Heyday, celebrates the remarkable wildlife of the Golden State along with the people Chapter 2: The Lone Wolf: OR7, His Quest for Romance in the Golden caring for it—sometimes in their own backyards. To frame the larger issues State, and Other Tales of California Rewilding at stake, Beth shares her own wildlife adventures, which include tracking mountain lions in the middle of Los Angeles, visiting the Facebook campus Chapter 3: They Left Their Hearts in San Francisco: The Amazing in Menlo Park to meet its family of gray foxes, watching a peregrine falcon Return of the Harbor Porpoise and Other Critters from the mayor’s office in San Jose, and gazing at porpoises swimming under the Golden Gate Bridge. When published, the book will be the center of a Chapter 4: Friending Wildlife: Why Mark Zuckerberg Likes the statewide public education program. Facebook Foxes and Wildlife Corridors among the High- Tech Giants Donors to the project will receive special recognition in the book and can sponsor a dedication or a chapter.
    [Show full text]
  • West Hollywood General Plan Safety Background Report
    West Hollywood General Plan Safety Background Report Providing a safe living environment is a fundamental goal and one of the most important challenges cities face today. Anticipating, planning for, and guarding against threats to public safety and welfare represent a critical function of government. This background report addresses the major public safety issues relevant to West Hollywood. The City of West Hollywood is located in a region exposed to environmental hazards that have the potential to cause natural disasters, including earthquakes and associated seismic hazards and wildland fires that could sweep down from the hills to the north. Additionally, the threat of terrorism and other homeland security issues has pushed safety issues and preparedness into the public consciousness. Residents and businesses look to the City to protect the community from threats to public safety. People recognize that a low crime rate, fire prevention, and reliable emergency response services contribute to the attractiveness of West Hollywood. While the City has no control over natural disasters, it can, and has, set forth policies to minimize exposure to these hazards. By identifying threats to safety, the City can better guard against disasters and develop effective response plans. Toward this end, the following issues are examined as relevant to the General Plan update effort: Flood and inundation Urban and wildland fires Emergency response Terrorism/National Security Emergency Seismic hazards and non-seismic geologic hazards are addressed in
    [Show full text]
  • California State University, Northridge Memorialization
    CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE MEMORIALIZATION AND MEMORY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA’S ST. FRANCIS DAM DISASTER OF 1928 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Master of Arts in Anthropology, Public Archaeology By Ann C. Stansell August 2014 The thesis of Ann C. Stansell is approved: _____________________________________________ _______________ Dr. Rachel F. Giraudo Date _____________________________________________ _______________ Dr. Sabina Magliocco Date _____________________________________________ _______________ Dr. James E. Snead, Chair Date California State University, Northridge ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research project would not have been possible without the contributions of many individuals to whom I am heavily indebted. I am grateful to Dr. James E. Snead for engaging me in the subject of the St. Francis Dam Disaster and providing support by creating the Forgotten Casualties Project, arranging access to the St. Francis Dam Disaster Claims Files, and hosting the Facebook page St. Francis Dam Archaeology. I appreciate the Anthropology Department at California State University, Northridge, for hosting the Forgotten Casualties Project, faculty and staff for encouraging me to present at archaeological conferences and host annual data sharing meetings, and my committee, Dr. James E. Snead, Dr. Sabina Magliocco, and Dr. Rachel F. Giraudo, for their mentoring throughout the writing of this thesis. Thanks are due to Krystal Kissinger and Efren Martinez for researching and presenting on
    [Show full text]
  • GRIFFITH PARK PERFORMING ARTS CENTER Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
    GRIFFITH PARK PERFORMING ARTS CENTER Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared for December 2013 City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks GRIFFITH PARK PERFORMING ARTS CENTER Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared for December 2013 City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks 626 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213.599.4300 www.esassoc.com Oakland Orlando Palm Springs Petaluma Portland Sacramento San Diego San Francisco Santa Cruz Seattle Tampa Woodland Hills 130367.02 TABLE OF CONTENTS Griffith Park Performing Arts Center Project Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration Page Chapter 1: Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Project Location and Setting ....................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Project Description ...................................................................................................................... 1-6 1.4 Project Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 1-13 1.5 Construction Program ............................................................................................................... 1-13 1.6 Required
    [Show full text]
  • Chronology of the Hollywood Area and the Cahuenga Pass
    The Chronology of Hollywood and the Cahuenga Pass 1769 The Spanish Explorer Gaspar de Portolá crosses the hills into the San Fernando Valley and names it the “Valley de Santa Catalina de Boronia de los Encinos” or the “Valley of the Oaks.” This area is known as “Kawengna,” meaning “little hills” in native Gabrieliño. January 15, 1975 This area including Hollywood is granted to Señor Moreno (later known as Rancho La Brea) including La Nopalera at the south entrance to El Portozuelo (Cahuenga Pass). 1797 The Mission San Fernando Rey de España is founded by Franciscan priests. 18th Century The road is part of El Camino Réal del Rey linking the missions of Alta California together. It functions as a wagon road, herding trail and mail route. September 7, 1821 Mexico declares its independence from Spain. June 6, 1828 Señor Moreno is dispossessed and his land grant is divided. 1831 The first Battle of Cahuenga Pass – and problems with the Mexican governor. 1845 The Second Battle of Cahuenga Pass. Winter 1846 The Mission San Fernando grant is sold by Governor Pío Pico to Eulogio de Celis. January 13, 1847 The Treaty of Cahuenga is signed near the site of the old Cahuenga Chapel and is approved by General John C. Fremont, surrendering Alta California to the U.S. and ending the Mexican- American War in California. 1848 The Butterfield Overland Mail Company initiates regular crossings twice a week, transporting mail from St. Louis to San Francisco. 1850 California enters the Union as a free state. April 4, 1850 The City of Los Angeles is incorporated.
    [Show full text]
  • St. Francis Dam
    A reprint from American Scientist the magazine of Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society This reprint is provided for personal and noncommercial use. For any other use, please send a request to Permissions, American Scientist, P.O. Box 13975, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709, U.S.A., or by electronic mail to [email protected]. ©Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society and other rightsholders ENGINEERING ST. FRANCIS DAM Henry Petroski os Angeles could not have grown into the Mulholland later recalled that he became in- Lmetropolis that it is today without the ex- terested in things technical when serving as pansion of its water supply. In 1900 the city’s a helper on a drill rig digging water wells population was about 100,000 and growing that pierced a buried tree trunk at a depth of rapidly, to reach 175,000 within five years. Since 600 feet. He went to the library to investi- the Los Angeles River watershed was capable of gate the manner by which a tree could be- supporting only about 200,000 people, the city come buried at such great depth, and read had the choice of limiting growth or finding new University of California Professor John sources of water. A drought in 1904 raised the is- LeConte’s Introduction to Physical Geology. sue to crisis proportions. Mulholland liked the subject matter so Los Angeles’s need to import water had been much that he later recalled, “Right there I foreseen a decade earlier by Fred Eaton, who as decided to become an engineer”.… city engineer had identified the Owens Valley, north of the city, as a likely candidate.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Resources Survey Report Hollywood Community Plan Area
    Historic Resources Survey Report Hollywood Community Plan Area Prepared for: City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning Office of Historic Resources Prepared by: August 2011 Revised, November 2015 Table of Contents Project Overview 1 SurveyLA Methodology Summary 1 Project Team 3 Survey Area 3 Designated Resources 13 Community Plan Area Survey Methodology 11 Summary of Findings 13 Summary of Property Types 13 Summary of Contexts and Themes 16 For Further Reading 62 Appendices Appendix A: Individual Resources Appendix B: Non-Parcel Resources Appendix C: Historic Districts & Planning Districts SurveyLA Hollywood Community Plan Area Project Overview This historic resources survey report (“Survey Report”) has been completed on behalf of the City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning’s Office of Historic Resources (OHR) for the SurveyLA historic resources survey of the Hollywood Community Plan Area (CPA). This project was originally undertaken as part of the first group of SurveyLA surveys from June 2010 to August 2011 by Historic Resources Group (HRG), with fieldwork assistance from Page & Turnbull. Since that time the survey finding were revised and updated by HRG to reflect subsequent refinements in survey methodology as well as the development of additional historic contexts and themes relevant to Hollywood. This Survey Report provides a summary of the work completed, including a description of the Survey Area, an overview of the field methodology; a summary of relevant contexts, themes and property types, and complete lists of all recorded resources. This Survey Report is intended to be used in conjunction with the SurveyLA Field Results Master Report (“Master Report”) which provides a detailed discussion of SurveyLA methodology and explains the terms used in this report and associated appendices.
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles, CA 90017
    Drop By if You Can! May 2nd 10 – 2 The BLOC 700 W 7th St. Los Angeles, CA 90017 ** Please note that these sites are not official FFAC Climb locations. These are just suggestions for your convenience and are by no means an exhaustive list. You are invited to choose an option that works for you. We will have a small activation at THE BLOC DTLA on 5/2 from 10-2 should you choose to mask up, follow COVID Protocols and join us. Thank you for your support and participation!#SoCalClimb #ClimbCA #theblocla Steps/ City Location Address Parking Notes Distance HERO Locations LA - DTLA THE BLOC 700 W 7th St, Los FFAC all-day Come enjoy this open-air plaza in downtown Los Angeles, CA 90017 special rate: $10 Angeles with a scavanger hunt, instagrambale for self-parking ; walls, DCBID activation and more $17 for valet parking. Rates are applicable only at The Bloc parking structure Staircases LA - Culver City Baldwin Hills Scenic Overlook Stairs6300 Hetzler Rd, Culver 282 steps Free street parkingEnjoy 360-degree views of Los Angeles City, CA 90232 at the bottom. Parking is also available at the top of the hill near the visitor center for a fee LA - Echo Park Baxter Street Stairs 1501 Baxter St., Los 231 steps Free residential Located on Baxter Street, three blocks Angeles, CA 90026 street parking east of Echo Park Ave. LA - Hollywood Broadview Terrace 6889 Yeager Pl., Los 249 steps Street Parking on Stairs/Los Altos Stairs Angeles, CA 90068 Camrose Dr. LA - DTLA Bunker Hill Steps 633 W 5th St, Los Angeles, 101 steps Parking garage- CA 90071 $3.50 per 10 min/ $35 maximum; Pershing Square; Metro Blue Line and Red Line both have stops near steps LA - Pacific Castellammare Stairs Castellammare Drive, 150+ steps Nearest parking at Palisades Pacific Palisades 90272 17575 Pacific Coast Highway or along the PCH SPONSORS Drop By if You Can!May 2nd 10 – 2 The BLOC 700 W 7th St.
    [Show full text]