626 Wilshire Boulevard www.esassoc.com Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017-2934 213.599.4300 phone 213.599.4301 fax
memorandum
date November 14, 2016
to Edward Paek
from Arabesque Abdelwahed
subject LAUSD Berendo Middle School – Preliminary CEQA Review for Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
This Memorandum presents the results of an analysis of air quality and greenhouse gas impacts related to proposed upgrades to the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) Berendo Middle School (MS) located at 1157 S Berendo Street in the City of Los Angeles. LAUSD proposes to improve the school with a new gymnasium, upgraded playfields, renovated restroom, and removal of relocatable classrooms. LAUSD also proposes to construct a new retaining wall along 11th Street.
In 2014, LAUSD approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) to remove 16 bungalow buildings at the Monsenor Oscar Romero Charter School (MORCS) located on the northeast portion of the Berendo MS site. The MND prepared for MORCS found that with incorporation of mitigation measures, implementation of that project would result in less-than-significant impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG), and noise. Because construction of the Berendo MS project (including the retaining wall) would overlap with construction activities at the MORCS site, additional analysis was performed to determine if overlapping activities would result in significant air quality and GHG impacts. Air Quality Regional Construction Emissions Implementation of the Berendo MS Project would result in short-term (construction-related) emissions associated with construction activities. Mass daily emissions during construction were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), which is an emissions estimation/evaluation model developed in conjunction with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and other California Air Districts. Construction emissions are associated with construction equipment exhaust, fugitive dust from demolition and earth-moving activities, construction-related vehicle trips, and off-gassing emissions from painting and asphalt paving. Emissions from construction of the MORCS project were obtained from the MORCS Certified MND.
Construction activities at the Berendo MS would occur during 2018 through early 2020 while construction at the MORCS would occur during 2017 through 2018. Construction emissions for the Berendo MS was calculated for each year of construction and added to the MORCS construction emissions to assess potential air quality impacts. Table 1, Estimated Regional Construction Emissions, summarizes daily construction emissions. As shown, maximum regional emissions would be below the SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance. As a result, the Berendo MS Project would not result in new significant impacts. Impacts would also be less than significant.
TABLE 1 ESTIMATED REGIONAL DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONSa
Regional Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
2017 MORCS 5 40 28 0.1 4 3 Total 5 40 28 0.1 4 3 2018 MORCS 40 24 18 0.0 2 2 Berendo MS 5 57 41 0.1 6 4 Total 45 81 59 0.1 7 5 2019 Berendo MS 13 40 39 0.1 3 2 2020 Berendo MS 13 37 38 0.1 7 3 Maximum Daily 45 81 59 0.1 7 5 Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Over/(Under) (30) (19) (491) (150) (143) (50) Exceed? No No No No No No NOTES: a. Emission quantities are rounded to “whole number” values. As such, the “total” values presented herein may be one unit more or less than actual values. Exact values (i.e., non-rounded) are provided in the CalEEMod model printout sheets and/or calculation worksheets that are presented in Appendix A. SOURCE: ESA, 2016
Regional Operational Emissions The Berendo MS Project would not result in the development of new land uses that would result in a substantial net increase in long-term operational emissions. The new gymnasium, upgraded play fields, and retaining wall would not result in additional vehicle trips to the site and would not include any new onsite stationary or area sources of emissions. The gymnasium would result in the development of a larger structure that would require electricity for lighting and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) needs. As a result, operational emissions from electricity and natural gas usage would increase due to the increased energy usage of the new gymnasium. As shown in Table 2, Regional Operational Emissions, criteria pollutant emissions would remain below significance thresholds. Thus, the Berendo MS Project (including the new retaining wall) would not result in significant impacts when combined with the MORCS Project.
2 TABLE 2 REGIONAL OPERATIONS EMISSIONSa (POUNDS PER DAY)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Regional Project Emissions Area 2 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 Energy <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 Berendo MS Total 2 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 MORCS Totalb 1 1 5 <1 1 <1 Combined Total 4 1 5 <1 1 <1
SCAQMD Significance Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Difference (51) (54) (545) (150) (149) (55) Significant? No No No No No No NOTES: a Emission quantities are rounded to “whole number” values. As such, the “total” values presented herein may be one unit more or less than actual values. Exact values (i.e., non-rounded) are provided in the CalEEMod model printout sheets and/or calculation worksheets that are presented in Appendix A. b MORCS emissions from Impact Sciences, Inc.
SOURCE: ESA, 2016.
Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Non-Attainment Pollutants As discussed in the previous section, the Berendo MS Project (including the retaining wall) would not result in short-term construction or long-term operational emissions that would exceed the regional significance thresholds for non-attainment pollutants (i.e., ozone and particulate matter). As a result, the Berendo MS Project, and the construction of the new retaining wall would not result in new significant impacts; and therefore, would also be less than significant for a cumulatively considerable net increase in non-attainment pollutants.
Expose Sensitive Receptors to Substantial Pollutant Concentrations As discussed in the MORCS Certified MND, sensitive receptors refer to land uses and/or activities that are especially sensitive to poor air quality. Sensitive receptors typically include homes, schools, playgrounds, hospitals, convalescent homes, and other facilities where children or the elderly may congregate. The nearest sensitive receptors are the MORCS and single family residences located adjacent to the site, along the western boundary. Air pollutant concentrations at a sensitive receptor decreases with increasing distance from the source. As shown Table 3, Estimated Localized Construction Emissions, combined onsite construction emissions of Berendo MS, new retaining wall and MORCS would not result in ambient concentrations that would exceed the localized significance thresholds at sensitive receptors. As a result, the Berendo MS Project (including the retaining wall) would not result in significant impacts when combined with the MORCS Project.
3 TABLE 3 ESTIMATED LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Localized Emissions (lbs/day)
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
2017 MORCS Demo 30 22 2 2 MORCS Grading 22 14 3 2 MORCS Construction/Paving + 36 24 2 2 Berendo Site Prep/Demo 2018 MORCS Construction/Coating + 45 35 12 4 Berendo Demo MORCS Construction/Coating + 40 25 2 2 Berendo Shoring MORCS Construction/Coating + 75 52 7 5 Berendo Excavation MORCS Construction/Coating + 37 27 2 2 Berendo Foundation MORCS Construction/Coating + 42 31 3 3 Berendo Construction 2019 Berendo Construction, Paving, and Coating 37 34 2 2 2020 Berendo Construction, Paving, and Coating 34 33 2 2 Maximized Emissions 75 52 12 5 Localized Significance Threshold (LST) 161 1,861 16 8 Over/(Under) (86) (1,809) (4) (3) Exceed? No No No No
NOTE: LST based on Central LA (SRA 1), 5-acre site, 25 m distance SOURCE: ESA, 2016
Odors According to the MORCS Project MND, no odors were noted in the area surrounding the project site. No significant adverse impacts related to odors are anticipated with the Berendo MS Project or new retaining wall. The Berendo MS Project would include a new gymnasium, upgraded play field, renovation of restrooms, and removal of portable classrooms. As such, no new sources of odors would be introduced to the area. As a result, the Berendo MS Project would not result in new significant impacts. Impacts would also be less than significant.
Conclusion The Berendo MS Project (including the retaining wall) would not result in new significant air quality impacts. Additionally, air quality impacts associated with the Berendo MS Project’s and retaining wall would not result in a significant impact when combined with air quality impacts related to the MORCS Project.
4 Greenhouse Gas Greenhouse Gas Emissions In addition to criteria pollutant emissions, construction of the Berendo MS Project and retaining wall would generate short-term and temporary GHG emissions during active construction activities. Sources of GHG emissions include exhaust emissions from heavy-duty construction equipment, delivery trucks, and worker commutes. Because GHG emissions from construction are temporary, construction-related GHG emissions are amortize over a project’s lifetime (typically defined as 30 years) and included in a project’s operational emissions so that GHG reduction measures will address construction GHG emissions as part of a project’s overall GHG reduction strategies. Construction of the Berendo MS Project and retaining wall would result in a total of
approximately 543 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MTCO2e). When amortized over a 30-year project
lifetime, the construction GHG emissions would be approximately 18 MTCO2e per year.
The Berendo MS Project would not result in the development of new land uses that would result in a substantial net increase in long-term operational GHG emissions. The new gymnasium and upgraded play fields would not result in additional vehicle trips to the site and would not include any new onsite stationary or area sources of GHG emissions. The gymnasium would result in the development of a larger structure that would require electricity for lighting and HVAC needs. The Berendo MS Project’s new lighting and HVAC systems would comply with and/or improve upon the applicable energy efficiency requirements of the Title 24 California Building Standards Code, including Title 24, Part 11 (the California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code). The Berendo MS Project would install energy efficient lighting, although the area of light coverage would be greater given the increased floor area. As a result, the Berendo MS Project is estimated to result in an increase
of approximately 278 MTCO2e per year. When combined with the amortized construction GHG emissions, the incremental increase would be approximately 298 MTCO2e per year. The increase in GHG emissions resulting from the Berendo MS Project combined with the MORCS GHG emissions would remain below significance thresholds as shown in Table 4. Therefore, based on the above analysis, construction and operation of the Berendo MS Project would not result in significant GHG impacts when combined with the MORCS project.
5 TABLE 4 BERENDO MIDDLE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
a GHG Emissions Emission Source MTCO2e (Metric Ton CO2e/Year)
Proposed Project Operational Area Sources <1 Energy Usage (Electricity, Natural Gas) 216 Water Conveyance 33 Waste 30 Construction (Amortized) 20 Berendo MS Subtotal 298 MORCS Total 289 Combined Total 587 Draft SCAQMD GHG Threshold 3,000 Exceed Threshold? No
a Numbers may not add up exactly due to rounding.
Source: ESA, 2016.
Greenhouse Gas Plans The Berendo MS Project would incorporate design features consistent with State efforts to reduce GHG emissions, as required by AB 32. As discussed previously, the Berendo MS Project would not result in a net increase in mobile sources of GHG emissions. The Berendo MS Project would require electricity for lighting needs and HVAC operation. The Berendo MS Project’s lighting and HVAC systems would comply with or improve upon the applicable energy efficiency requirements of the CALGreen Code. While construction and operation of the Berendo MS Project and retaining wall would result in a negligible change in GHG emissions as analyzed in the MORCS Certified MND, the Project would not conflict with the ability of the MORCS Project to achieve GHG reductions consistent with the goals of AB 32. Therefore, construction and operation of the Berendo MS Project would not result in new significant impacts. Impacts would also be less than significant.
Conclusion The Berendo MS Project (including the retaining wall) would not result in new significant GHG impacts. Additionally, GHG impacts associate with the Berendo MS Project’s and retaining wall would not result in a significant impact when combined with GHG impacts related to the MORCS Project.
6 LAUSD, Berendo Middle School Air Quality Worksheets
Construction Emissions . CalEEMod Outputs
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 11/3/2016 1:49 PM
Berendo MS Construction South Coast Air Basin, Summer
1.0 Project Characteristics
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Junior High School 50.00 1000sqft 1.15 50,000.00 0
City Park 1.00 Acre 1.00 43,560.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31
Climate Zone 11 Operational Year 2019
Utility Company Los Angeles Department of Water & Power
CO2 Intensity 1227.89 CH4 Intensity 0.029 N2O Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction Phase - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" (1 Tractor/Loader Backhoe added for retaining wall) Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Trips and VMT - Vendor Trip added in Excavation Phase for retaining wall. Demolition - Grading - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 60.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 220.00 235.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 28.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6.00 31.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 21.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 21.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 3.00 5.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 6/17/2019 3/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 4/23/2019 3/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 2/7/2018 12/31/2017
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 1/15/2018 2/15/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/26/2019 1/1/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/31/2018 4/1/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/26/2019 2/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 2/1/2018 12/24/2017
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 1/1/2018 2/1/2018
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 46.50 2.15
tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 9,240.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 3.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 3.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 0.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 0.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 0.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment PhaseName Excavation
tblOffRoadEquipment PhaseName Excavation
tblOffRoadEquipment PhaseName Excavation
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 6.00 8.00
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00
tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 1,545.00 1,137.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 20.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 1,155.00 660.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 694.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 1,260.00
tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 1.00
2.0 Emissions Summary
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Year lb/day lb/day
2017 4.5331 47.5189 34.4695 0.0686 15.3894 2.2757 17.6651 2.6804 2.1427 4.8231 0.0000 6,773.885 6,773.8856 0.7867 0.0000 6,790.406 6 0
2018 5.0967 56.8721 40.0383 0.0687 12.8775 2.6452 14.2977 3.4800 2.4336 5.9136 0.0000 6,812.671 6,812.6715 1.5964 0.0000 6,846.195 5 6
2019 41.2062 43.2396 41.7501 0.0803 1.1863 2.2469 3.4332 0.3196 2.1128 2.4325 0.0000 7,491.759 7,491.7591 1.3962 0.0000 7,521.078 1 6
Total 50.8359 147.6306 116.2579 0.2176 29.4532 7.1678 35.3961 6.4800 6.6891 13.1692 0.0000 21,078.31 21,078.316 3.7792 0.0000 21,157.68 62 2 02
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Year lb/day lb/day
2017 4.5331 47.5189 34.4695 0.0686 8.1052 2.2757 10.3809 1.5775 2.1427 3.7202 0.0000 6,773.885 6,773.8855 0.7867 0.0000 6,790.406 5 0
2018 5.0967 56.8721 40.0383 0.0687 5.5932 2.6452 7.0135 1.4528 2.4336 3.8864 0.0000 6,812.671 6,812.6715 1.5964 0.0000 6,846.195 5 6
2019 41.2062 43.2396 41.7501 0.0803 1.1863 2.2469 3.4332 0.3196 2.1128 2.4325 0.0000 7,491.759 7,491.7591 1.3962 0.0000 7,521.078 1 5
Total 50.8359 147.6306 116.2579 0.2176 14.8847 7.1678 20.8275 3.3499 6.6891 10.0391 0.0000 21,078.31 21,078.316 3.7792 0.0000 21,157.68 62 2 02
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.46 0.00 41.16 48.30 0.00 23.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reduction
3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase
Phase Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Num Days Phase Description Number Week
1 Demolition (Gym) Demolition 12/24/2017 1/31/2018 5 28
2 Removal of Bungalows Site Preparation 12/24/2017 12/31/2017 5 5
3 Shoring (Fields) Trenching 2/1/2018 2/15/2018 5 11
4 Excavation Grading 2/16/2018 3/30/2018 5 31
5 Foundation (Gym) Paving 4/1/2018 4/30/2018 5 21
6 Building Construction (Gym) Building Construction 5/1/2018 3/25/2019 5 235
7 Architectural Coating (Gym) Architectural Coating 1/1/2019 3/25/2019 5 60
8 Paving Paving 2/25/2019 3/25/2019 5 21
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 140,340; Non-Residential Outdoor: 46,780 (Architectural Coating –
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition (Gym) Concrete/Industrial Saws 2 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition (Gym) Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40
Demolition (Gym) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Removal of Bungalows Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Removal of Bungalows Forklifts 2 8.00 89 0.20
Removal of Bungalows Graders 0 8.00 174 0.41
Removal of Bungalows Scrapers 0 8.00 361 0.48
Removal of Bungalows Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 7.00 97 0.37
Shoring (Fields) Bore/Drill Rigs 2 8.00 205 0.50
Shoring (Fields) Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Shoring (Fields) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Excavation Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Excavation Excavators 1 8.00 162 0.38
Excavation Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41
Excavation Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40
Excavation Scrapers 1 8.00 361 0.48
Excavation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Foundation (Gym) Bore/Drill Rigs 1 8.00 205 0.50
Foundation (Gym) Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56
Foundation (Gym) Pavers 1 8.00 125 0.42
Foundation (Gym) Paving Equipment 0 8.00 130 0.36
Foundation (Gym) Pumps 1 8.00 84 0.74
Foundation (Gym) Rollers 1 8.00 80 0.38
Foundation (Gym) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction (Gym) Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Building Construction (Gym) Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction (Gym) Generator Sets 0 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction (Gym) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction (Gym) Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating (Gym) Aerial Lifts 2 6.00 62 0.31
Architectural Coating (Gym) Air Compressors 2 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 125 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 130 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Vehicle Vendor Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class
Demolition (Gym) 4 10.00 0.00 1,137.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Removal of Bungalows 3 8.00 0.00 20.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Shoring (Fields) 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Excavation 7 18.00 1.00 660.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Foundation (Gym) 5 13.00 0.00 694.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 8 39.00 15.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT (Gym) Architectural Coating 4 8.00 0.00 1,260.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT (Gym) Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
3.2 Demolition (Gym) - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 11.9414 0.0000 11.9414 1.8080 0.0000 1.8080 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.6689 24.7589 19.8327 0.0245 1.4550 1.4550 1.3876 1.3876 2,413.602 2,413.6029 0.4806 2,423.696 9 1
Total 2.6689 24.7589 19.8327 0.0245 11.9414 1.4550 13.3964 1.8080 1.3876 3.1957 2,413.602 2,413.6029 0.4806 2,423.696 9 1 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.6618 10.3137 7.5790 0.0300 3.1771 0.1591 3.3362 0.7999 0.1464 0.9463 2,971.862 2,971.8620 0.0212 2,972.307 0 6
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0374 0.0470 0.5870 1.4200e- 0.1118 9.0000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.3000e- 0.0305 114.4058 114.4058 5.6300e- 114.5239 003 004 004 003
Total 0.6992 10.3607 8.1661 0.0314 3.2889 0.1600 3.4489 0.8296 0.1472 0.9768 3,086.267 3,086.2677 0.0269 3,086.831 7 6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 4.6572 0.0000 4.6572 0.7051 0.0000 0.7051 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.6689 24.7589 19.8327 0.0245 1.4550 1.4550 1.3876 1.3876 0.0000 2,413.602 2,413.6029 0.4806 2,423.696 9 1
Total 2.6689 24.7589 19.8327 0.0245 4.6572 1.4550 6.1121 0.7051 1.3876 2.0928 0.0000 2,413.602 2,413.6029 0.4806 2,423.696 9 1 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.6618 10.3137 7.5790 0.0300 3.1771 0.1591 3.3362 0.7999 0.1464 0.9463 2,971.862 2,971.8620 0.0212 2,972.307 0 6
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0374 0.0470 0.5870 1.4200e- 0.1118 9.0000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.3000e- 0.0305 114.4058 114.4058 5.6300e- 114.5239 003 004 004 003
Total 0.6992 10.3607 8.1661 0.0314 3.2889 0.1600 3.4489 0.8296 0.1472 0.9768 3,086.267 3,086.2677 0.0269 3,086.831 7 6
3.2 Demolition (Gym) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 11.9414 0.0000 11.9414 1.8080 0.0000 1.8080 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.3807 22.1563 18.7475 0.0245 1.2603 1.2603 1.2022 1.2022 2,394.328 2,394.3283 0.4682 2,404.159 3 5
Total 2.3807 22.1563 18.7475 0.0245 11.9414 1.2603 13.2017 1.8080 1.2022 3.0103 2,394.328 2,394.3283 0.4682 2,404.159 3 5 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.6473 9.5743 7.3998 0.0299 0.8243 0.1590 0.9834 0.2224 0.1463 0.3687 2,922.555 2,922.5551 0.0215 2,923.006 1 6
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0337 0.0427 0.5334 1.4200e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 110.1488 110.1488 5.2200e- 110.2585 003 004 004 003
Total 0.6810 9.6170 7.9332 0.0313 0.9361 0.1599 1.0960 0.2521 0.1471 0.3992 3,032.703 3,032.7038 0.0267 3,033.265 8 1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 4.6572 0.0000 4.6572 0.7051 0.0000 0.7051 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.3807 22.1563 18.7475 0.0245 1.2603 1.2603 1.2022 1.2022 0.0000 2,394.328 2,394.3283 0.4682 2,404.159 3 5
Total 2.3807 22.1563 18.7475 0.0245 4.6572 1.2603 5.9175 0.7051 1.2022 1.9073 0.0000 2,394.328 2,394.3283 0.4682 2,404.159 3 5 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.6473 9.5743 7.3998 0.0299 0.8243 0.1590 0.9834 0.2224 0.1463 0.3687 2,922.555 2,922.5551 0.0215 2,923.006 1 6
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0337 0.0427 0.5334 1.4200e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 110.1488 110.1488 5.2200e- 110.2585 003 004 004 003
Total 0.6810 9.6170 7.9332 0.0313 0.9361 0.1599 1.0960 0.2521 0.1471 0.3992 3,032.703 3,032.7038 0.0267 3,033.265 8 1
3.3 Removal of Bungalows - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0699 11.3458 5.2545 8.6900e- 0.6443 0.6443 0.5928 0.5928 889.7475 889.7475 0.2726 895.4725 003
Total 1.0699 11.3458 5.2545 8.6900e- 0.0000 0.6443 0.6443 0.0000 0.5928 0.5928 889.7475 889.7475 0.2726 895.4725 003 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0652 1.0159 0.7466 2.9500e- 0.0697 0.0157 0.0854 0.0191 0.0144 0.0335 292.7428 292.7428 2.0900e- 292.7867 003 003
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0299 0.0376 0.4696 1.1300e- 0.0894 7.2000e- 0.0901 0.0237 6.6000e- 0.0244 91.5246 91.5246 4.5000e- 91.6192 003 004 004 003
Total 0.0951 1.0536 1.2162 4.0800e- 0.1591 0.0164 0.1755 0.0428 0.0151 0.0579 384.2674 384.2674 6.5900e- 384.4058 003 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0699 11.3458 5.2545 8.6900e- 0.6443 0.6443 0.5928 0.5928 0.0000 889.7475 889.7475 0.2726 895.4725 003
Total 1.0699 11.3458 5.2545 8.6900e- 0.0000 0.6443 0.6443 0.0000 0.5928 0.5928 0.0000 889.7475 889.7475 0.2726 895.4725 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0652 1.0159 0.7466 2.9500e- 0.0697 0.0157 0.0854 0.0191 0.0144 0.0335 292.7428 292.7428 2.0900e- 292.7867 003 003
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0299 0.0376 0.4696 1.1300e- 0.0894 7.2000e- 0.0901 0.0237 6.6000e- 0.0244 91.5246 91.5246 4.5000e- 91.6192 003 004 004 003
Total 0.0951 1.0536 1.2162 4.0800e- 0.1591 0.0164 0.1755 0.0428 0.0151 0.0579 384.2674 384.2674 6.5900e- 384.4058 003 003
3.4 Shoring (Fields) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3833 17.0875 8.6845 0.0262 0.6951 0.6951 0.6395 0.6395 2,632.774 2,632.7747 0.8196 2,649.986 7 7
Total 1.3833 17.0875 8.6845 0.0262 0.6951 0.6951 0.6395 0.6395 2,632.774 2,632.7747 0.8196 2,649.986 7 7 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0337 0.0427 0.5334 1.4200e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 110.1488 110.1488 5.2200e- 110.2585 003 004 004 003
Total 0.0337 0.0427 0.5334 1.4200e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 110.1488 110.1488 5.2200e- 110.2585 003 004 004 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3833 17.0875 8.6845 0.0262 0.6951 0.6951 0.6395 0.6395 0.0000 2,632.774 2,632.7747 0.8196 2,649.986 7 7
Total 1.3833 17.0875 8.6845 0.0262 0.6951 0.6951 0.6395 0.6395 0.0000 2,632.774 2,632.7747 0.8196 2,649.986 7 7 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0337 0.0427 0.5334 1.4200e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 110.1488 110.1488 5.2200e- 110.2585 003 004 004 003
Total 0.0337 0.0427 0.5334 1.4200e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 110.1488 110.1488 5.2200e- 110.2585 003 004 004 003
3.5 Excavation - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 6.1293 0.0000 6.1293 3.3233 0.0000 3.3233 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.6894 51.7029 35.1091 0.0503 2.5591 2.5591 2.3543 2.3543 5,061.001 5,061.0016 1.5756 5,094.088 6 3
Total 4.6894 51.7029 35.1091 0.0503 6.1293 2.5591 8.6884 3.3233 2.3543 5.6776 5,061.001 5,061.0016 1.5756 5,094.088 6 3 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3394 5.0198 3.8797 0.0157 0.3710 0.0834 0.4544 0.1016 0.0767 0.1783 1,532.295 1,532.2954 0.0113 1,532.532 4 2
Vendor 7.1800e- 0.0726 0.0894 2.2000e- 6.2500e- 1.1900e- 7.4400e- 1.7800e- 1.0900e- 2.8700e- 21.1067 21.1067 1.5000e- 21.1099 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
Worker 0.0607 0.0768 0.9601 2.5500e- 0.2012 1.5800e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4600e- 0.0548 198.2678 198.2678 9.4000e- 198.4652 003 003 003 003
Total 0.4073 5.1692 4.9292 0.0185 0.5785 0.0862 0.6646 0.1567 0.0793 0.2360 1,751.669 1,751.6699 0.0208 1,752.107 9 3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.3904 0.0000 2.3904 1.2961 0.0000 1.2961 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.6894 51.7029 35.1091 0.0503 2.5591 2.5591 2.3543 2.3543 0.0000 5,061.001 5,061.0016 1.5756 5,094.088 6 3
Total 4.6894 51.7029 35.1091 0.0503 2.3904 2.5591 4.9495 1.2961 2.3543 3.6504 0.0000 5,061.001 5,061.0016 1.5756 5,094.088 6 3 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3394 5.0198 3.8797 0.0157 0.3710 0.0834 0.4544 0.1016 0.0767 0.1783 1,532.295 1,532.2954 0.0113 1,532.532 4 2
Vendor 7.1800e- 0.0726 0.0894 2.2000e- 6.2500e- 1.1900e- 7.4400e- 1.7800e- 1.0900e- 2.8700e- 21.1067 21.1067 1.5000e- 21.1099 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
Worker 0.0607 0.0768 0.9601 2.5500e- 0.2012 1.5800e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4600e- 0.0548 198.2678 198.2678 9.4000e- 198.4652 003 003 003 003
Total 0.4073 5.1692 4.9292 0.0185 0.5785 0.0862 0.6646 0.1567 0.0793 0.2360 1,751.669 1,751.6699 0.0208 1,752.107 9 3
3.6 Foundation (Gym) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4414 14.3984 10.8034 0.0231 0.7419 0.7419 0.7058 0.7058 2,268.376 2,268.3766 0.5489 2,279.903 6 1
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.4414 14.3984 10.8034 0.0231 0.7419 0.7419 0.7058 0.7058 2,268.376 2,268.3766 0.5489 2,279.903 6 1 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.5268 7.7919 6.0223 0.0244 0.5759 0.1294 0.7053 0.1577 0.1191 0.2768 2,378.485 2,378.4852 0.0175 2,378.852 2 6
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0439 0.0555 0.6934 1.8400e- 0.1453 1.1400e- 0.1465 0.0385 1.0500e- 0.0396 143.1934 143.1934 6.7900e- 143.3360 003 003 003 003
Total 0.5706 7.8474 6.7157 0.0262 0.7212 0.1306 0.8518 0.1962 0.1201 0.3164 2,521.678 2,521.6785 0.0243 2,522.188 5 6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4414 14.3984 10.8034 0.0231 0.7419 0.7419 0.7058 0.7058 0.0000 2,268.376 2,268.3766 0.5489 2,279.903 6 1
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.4414 14.3984 10.8034 0.0231 0.7419 0.7419 0.7058 0.7058 0.0000 2,268.376 2,268.3766 0.5489 2,279.903 6 1 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.5268 7.7919 6.0223 0.0244 0.5759 0.1294 0.7053 0.1577 0.1191 0.2768 2,378.485 2,378.4852 0.0175 2,378.852 2 6
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0439 0.0555 0.6934 1.8400e- 0.1453 1.1400e- 0.1465 0.0385 1.0500e- 0.0396 143.1934 143.1934 6.7900e- 143.3360 003 003 003 003
Total 0.5706 7.8474 6.7157 0.0262 0.7212 0.1306 0.8518 0.1962 0.1201 0.3164 2,521.678 2,521.6785 0.0243 2,522.188 5 6
3.7 Building Construction (Gym) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.6842 19.0722 14.0147 0.0210 1.1927 1.1927 1.1245 1.1245 1,964.602 1,964.6028 0.5372 1,975.884 8 4
Total 2.6842 19.0722 14.0147 0.0210 1.1927 1.1927 1.1245 1.1245 1,964.602 1,964.6028 0.5372 1,975.884 8 4 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1077 1.0892 1.3407 3.2600e- 0.0938 0.0178 0.1116 0.0267 0.0164 0.0431 316.6011 316.6011 2.2600e- 316.6485 003 003
Worker 0.1316 0.1664 2.0802 5.5200e- 0.4359 3.4100e- 0.4393 0.1156 3.1600e- 0.1188 429.5802 429.5802 0.0204 430.0080 003 003 003
Total 0.2393 1.2556 3.4208 8.7800e- 0.5297 0.0212 0.5509 0.1423 0.0195 0.1618 746.1812 746.1812 0.0226 746.6564 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.6842 19.0722 14.0147 0.0210 1.1927 1.1927 1.1245 1.1245 0.0000 1,964.602 1,964.6028 0.5372 1,975.884 8 4
Total 2.6842 19.0722 14.0147 0.0210 1.1927 1.1927 1.1245 1.1245 0.0000 1,964.602 1,964.6028 0.5372 1,975.884 8 4 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1077 1.0892 1.3407 3.2600e- 0.0938 0.0178 0.1116 0.0267 0.0164 0.0431 316.6011 316.6011 2.2600e- 316.6485 003 003
Worker 0.1316 0.1664 2.0802 5.5200e- 0.4359 3.4100e- 0.4393 0.1156 3.1600e- 0.1188 429.5802 429.5802 0.0204 430.0080 003 003 003
Total 0.2393 1.2556 3.4208 8.7800e- 0.5297 0.0212 0.5509 0.1423 0.0195 0.1618 746.1812 746.1812 0.0226 746.6564 003
3.7 Building Construction (Gym) - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.3613 17.3721 13.5502 0.0210 1.0361 1.0361 0.9771 0.9771 1,942.783 1,942.7830 0.5218 1,953.740 0 7
Total 2.3613 17.3721 13.5502 0.0210 1.0361 1.0361 0.9771 0.9771 1,942.783 1,942.7830 0.5218 1,953.740 0 7 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1020 1.0049 1.2903 3.2400e- 0.0938 0.0169 0.1107 0.0267 0.0155 0.0422 310.4318 310.4318 2.2100e- 310.4783 003 003
Worker 0.1211 0.1526 1.9118 5.5100e- 0.4359 3.3500e- 0.4393 0.1156 3.1100e- 0.1187 413.2932 413.2932 0.0191 413.6937 003 003 003
Total 0.2232 1.1574 3.2021 8.7500e- 0.5297 0.0202 0.5499 0.1423 0.0186 0.1610 723.7251 723.7251 0.0213 724.1720 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.3613 17.3721 13.5502 0.0210 1.0361 1.0361 0.9771 0.9771 0.0000 1,942.783 1,942.7830 0.5218 1,953.740 0 7
Total 2.3613 17.3721 13.5502 0.0210 1.0361 1.0361 0.9771 0.9771 0.0000 1,942.783 1,942.7830 0.5218 1,953.740 0 7 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1020 1.0049 1.2903 3.2400e- 0.0938 0.0169 0.1107 0.0267 0.0155 0.0422 310.4318 310.4318 2.2100e- 310.4783 003 003
Worker 0.1211 0.1526 1.9118 5.5100e- 0.4359 3.3500e- 0.4393 0.1156 3.1100e- 0.1187 413.2932 413.2932 0.0191 413.6937 003 003 003
Total 0.2232 1.1574 3.2021 8.7500e- 0.5297 0.0202 0.5499 0.1423 0.0186 0.1610 723.7251 723.7251 0.0213 724.1720 003
3.8 Architectural Coating (Gym) - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 36.1376 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.5930 4.6758 5.2958 8.4200e- 0.2822 0.2822 0.2802 0.2802 808.2886 808.2886 0.1252 810.9174 003
Total 36.7306 4.6758 5.2958 8.4200e- 0.2822 0.2822 0.2802 0.2802 808.2886 808.2886 0.1252 810.9174 003 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3259 4.6290 3.7540 0.0154 0.3660 0.0823 0.4483 0.1002 0.0757 0.1759 1,481.944 1,481.9442 0.0111 1,482.176 2 2
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0248 0.0313 0.3922 1.1300e- 0.0894 6.9000e- 0.0901 0.0237 6.4000e- 0.0244 84.7781 84.7781 3.9100e- 84.8603 003 004 004 003
Total 0.3507 4.6603 4.1461 0.0166 0.4554 0.0830 0.5384 0.1239 0.0763 0.2003 1,566.722 1,566.7223 0.0150 1,567.036 3 5
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 36.1376 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.5930 4.6758 5.2958 8.4200e- 0.2822 0.2822 0.2802 0.2802 0.0000 808.2886 808.2886 0.1252 810.9174 003
Total 36.7306 4.6758 5.2958 8.4200e- 0.2822 0.2822 0.2802 0.2802 0.0000 808.2886 808.2886 0.1252 810.9174 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3259 4.6290 3.7540 0.0154 0.3660 0.0823 0.4483 0.1002 0.0757 0.1759 1,481.944 1,481.9442 0.0111 1,482.176 2 2
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0248 0.0313 0.3922 1.1300e- 0.0894 6.9000e- 0.0901 0.0237 6.4000e- 0.0244 84.7781 84.7781 3.9100e- 84.8603 003 004 004 003
Total 0.3507 4.6603 4.1461 0.0166 0.4554 0.0830 0.5384 0.1239 0.0763 0.2003 1,566.722 1,566.7223 0.0150 1,567.036 3 5
3.9 Paving - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4846 15.3035 14.6735 0.0230 0.8238 0.8238 0.7591 0.7591 2,259.489 2,259.4895 0.7041 2,274.276 5 4
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.4846 15.3035 14.6735 0.0230 0.8238 0.8238 0.7591 0.7591 2,259.489 2,259.4895 0.7041 2,274.276 5 4 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0559 0.0704 0.8824 2.5400e- 0.2012 1.5500e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4300e- 0.0548 190.7507 190.7507 8.8000e- 190.9356 003 003 003 003
Total 0.0559 0.0704 0.8824 2.5400e- 0.2012 1.5500e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4300e- 0.0548 190.7507 190.7507 8.8000e- 190.9356 003 003 003 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4846 15.3035 14.6735 0.0230 0.8238 0.8238 0.7591 0.7591 0.0000 2,259.489 2,259.4895 0.7041 2,274.276 5 4
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.4846 15.3035 14.6735 0.0230 0.8238 0.8238 0.7591 0.7591 0.0000 2,259.489 2,259.4895 0.7041 2,274.276 5 4 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0559 0.0704 0.8824 2.5400e- 0.2012 1.5500e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4300e- 0.0548 190.7507 190.7507 8.8000e- 190.9356 003 003 003 003
Total 0.0559 0.0704 0.8824 2.5400e- 0.2012 1.5500e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4300e- 0.0548 190.7507 190.7507 8.8000e- 190.9356 003 003 003 003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 11/3/2016 1:50 PM
Berendo MS Construction South Coast Air Basin, Winter
1.0 Project Characteristics
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Junior High School 50.00 1000sqft 1.15 50,000.00 0
City Park 1.00 Acre 1.00 43,560.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31
Climate Zone 11 Operational Year 2019
Utility Company Los Angeles Department of Water & Power
CO2 Intensity 1227.89 CH4 Intensity 0.029 N2O Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction Phase - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" (1 Tractor/Loader Backhoe added for retaining wall) Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Trips and VMT - Vendor Trip added in Excavation Phase for retaining wall. Demolition - Grading - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 60.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 220.00 235.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 28.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6.00 31.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 21.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 21.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 3.00 5.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 6/17/2019 3/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 4/23/2019 3/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 2/7/2018 12/31/2017
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 1/15/2018 2/15/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/26/2019 1/1/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/31/2018 4/1/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/26/2019 2/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 2/1/2018 12/24/2017
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 1/1/2018 2/1/2018
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 46.50 2.15
tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 9,240.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 3.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 3.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 0.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 0.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 0.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment PhaseName Excavation
tblOffRoadEquipment PhaseName Excavation
tblOffRoadEquipment PhaseName Excavation
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 6.00 8.00
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00
tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 1,545.00 1,137.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 20.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 1,155.00 660.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 694.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 1,260.00
tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 1.00
2.0 Emissions Summary
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Year lb/day lb/day
2017 4.5722 47.9367 35.6580 0.0684 15.3894 2.2761 17.6655 2.6804 2.1431 4.8235 0.0000 6,753.308 6,753.3081 0.7870 0.0000 6,769.835 1 4
2018 5.1147 57.0624 40.5875 0.0685 12.8775 2.6454 14.2981 3.4800 2.4338 5.9138 0.0000 6,796.483 6,796.4836 1.5966 0.0000 6,830.011 6 1
2019 41.2334 43.4545 42.3653 0.0797 1.1863 2.2472 3.4335 0.3196 2.1131 2.4328 0.0000 7,442.529 7,442.5291 1.3964 0.0000 7,471.853 1 5
Total 50.9202 148.4536 118.6107 0.2166 29.4532 7.1687 35.3971 6.4800 6.6900 13.1700 0.0000 20,992.32 20,992.320 3.7800 0.0000 21,071.69 08 8 99
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Year lb/day lb/day
2017 4.5722 47.9367 35.6580 0.0684 8.1052 2.2761 10.3813 1.5775 2.1431 3.7206 0.0000 6,753.308 6,753.3081 0.7870 0.0000 6,769.835 1 3
2018 5.1147 57.0624 40.5875 0.0685 5.5932 2.6454 7.0138 1.4528 2.4338 3.8866 0.0000 6,796.483 6,796.4835 1.5966 0.0000 6,830.011 5 1
2019 41.2334 43.4545 42.3653 0.0797 1.1863 2.2472 3.4335 0.3196 2.1131 2.4328 0.0000 7,442.529 7,442.5291 1.3964 0.0000 7,471.853 1 5
Total 50.9202 148.4536 118.6107 0.2166 14.8847 7.1687 20.8286 3.3499 6.6900 10.0399 0.0000 20,992.32 20,992.320 3.7800 0.0000 21,071.69 08 8 99
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.46 0.00 41.16 48.30 0.00 23.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reduction
3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase
Phase Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Num Days Phase Description Number Week
1 Demolition (Gym) Demolition 12/24/2017 1/31/2018 5 28
2 Removal of Bungalows Site Preparation 12/24/2017 12/31/2017 5 5
3 Shoring (Fields) Trenching 2/1/2018 2/15/2018 5 11
4 Excavation Grading 2/16/2018 3/30/2018 5 31
5 Foundation (Gym) Paving 4/1/2018 4/30/2018 5 21
6 Building Construction (Gym) Building Construction 5/1/2018 3/25/2019 5 235
7 Architectural Coating (Gym) Architectural Coating 1/1/2019 3/25/2019 5 60
8 Paving Paving 2/25/2019 3/25/2019 5 21
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 140,340; Non-Residential Outdoor: 46,780 (Architectural Coating –
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition (Gym) Concrete/Industrial Saws 2 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition (Gym) Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40
Demolition (Gym) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Removal of Bungalows Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Removal of Bungalows Forklifts 2 8.00 89 0.20
Removal of Bungalows Graders 0 8.00 174 0.41
Removal of Bungalows Scrapers 0 8.00 361 0.48
Removal of Bungalows Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 7.00 97 0.37
Shoring (Fields) Bore/Drill Rigs 2 8.00 205 0.50
Shoring (Fields) Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Shoring (Fields) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Excavation Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Excavation Excavators 1 8.00 162 0.38
Excavation Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41
Excavation Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40
Excavation Scrapers 1 8.00 361 0.48
Excavation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Foundation (Gym) Bore/Drill Rigs 1 8.00 205 0.50
Foundation (Gym) Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56
Foundation (Gym) Pavers 1 8.00 125 0.42
Foundation (Gym) Paving Equipment 0 8.00 130 0.36
Foundation (Gym) Pumps 1 8.00 84 0.74
Foundation (Gym) Rollers 1 8.00 80 0.38
Foundation (Gym) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction (Gym) Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Building Construction (Gym) Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction (Gym) Generator Sets 0 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction (Gym) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction (Gym) Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating (Gym) Aerial Lifts 2 6.00 62 0.31
Architectural Coating (Gym) Air Compressors 2 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 125 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 130 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Vehicle Vendor Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class
Demolition (Gym) 4 10.00 0.00 1,137.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Removal of Bungalows 3 8.00 0.00 20.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Shoring (Fields) 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Excavation 7 18.00 1.00 660.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Foundation (Gym) 5 13.00 0.00 694.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 8 39.00 15.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT (Gym) Architectural Coating 4 8.00 0.00 1,260.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT (Gym) Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
3.2 Demolition (Gym) - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 11.9414 0.0000 11.9414 1.8080 0.0000 1.8080 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.6689 24.7589 19.8327 0.0245 1.4550 1.4550 1.3876 1.3876 2,413.602 2,413.6029 0.4806 2,423.696 9 1
Total 2.6689 24.7589 19.8327 0.0245 11.9414 1.4550 13.3964 1.8080 1.3876 3.1957 2,413.602 2,413.6029 0.4806 2,423.696 9 1
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.6961 10.6864 8.7393 0.0299 3.1771 0.1595 3.3366 0.7999 0.1467 0.9466 2,964.798 2,964.7984 0.0215 2,965.250 4 2
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0382 0.0516 0.5392 1.3300e- 0.1118 9.0000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.3000e- 0.0305 107.2846 107.2846 5.6300e- 107.4028 003 004 004 003
Total 0.7343 10.7380 9.2785 0.0312 3.2889 0.1604 3.4493 0.8296 0.1475 0.9771 3,072.083 3,072.0830 0.0272 3,072.653 0 0
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 4.6572 0.0000 4.6572 0.7051 0.0000 0.7051 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.6689 24.7589 19.8327 0.0245 1.4550 1.4550 1.3876 1.3876 0.0000 2,413.602 2,413.6029 0.4806 2,423.696 9 1
Total 2.6689 24.7589 19.8327 0.0245 4.6572 1.4550 6.1121 0.7051 1.3876 2.0928 0.0000 2,413.602 2,413.6029 0.4806 2,423.696 9 1
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.6961 10.6864 8.7393 0.0299 3.1771 0.1595 3.3366 0.7999 0.1467 0.9466 2,964.798 2,964.7984 0.0215 2,965.250 4 2
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0382 0.0516 0.5392 1.3300e- 0.1118 9.0000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.3000e- 0.0305 107.2846 107.2846 5.6300e- 107.4028 003 004 004 003 Total 0.7343 10.7380 9.2785 0.0312 3.2889 0.1604 3.4493 0.8296 0.1475 0.9771 3,072.083 3,072.0830 0.0272 3,072.653 0 0
3.2 Demolition (Gym) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 11.9414 0.0000 11.9414 1.8080 0.0000 1.8080 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.3807 22.1563 18.7475 0.0245 1.2603 1.2603 1.2022 1.2022 2,394.328 2,394.3283 0.4682 2,404.159 3 5
Total 2.3807 22.1563 18.7475 0.0245 11.9414 1.2603 13.2017 1.8080 1.2022 3.0103 2,394.328 2,394.3283 0.4682 2,404.159 3 5
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.6784 9.9196 8.5656 0.0299 0.8243 0.1594 0.9837 0.2224 0.1466 0.3690 2,915.605 2,915.6051 0.0218 2,916.063 1 0
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0343 0.0468 0.4880 1.3300e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 103.2785 103.2785 5.2200e- 103.3882 003 004 004 003
Total 0.7127 9.9664 9.0536 0.0312 0.9361 0.1603 1.0964 0.2521 0.1474 0.3995 3,018.883 3,018.8836 0.0270 3,019.451 6 2
Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 4.6572 0.0000 4.6572 0.7051 0.0000 0.7051 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.3807 22.1563 18.7475 0.0245 1.2603 1.2603 1.2022 1.2022 0.0000 2,394.328 2,394.3283 0.4682 2,404.159 3 5
Total 2.3807 22.1563 18.7475 0.0245 4.6572 1.2603 5.9175 0.7051 1.2022 1.9073 0.0000 2,394.328 2,394.3283 0.4682 2,404.159 3 5
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.6784 9.9196 8.5656 0.0299 0.8243 0.1594 0.9837 0.2224 0.1466 0.3690 2,915.605 2,915.6051 0.0218 2,916.063 1 0
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0343 0.0468 0.4880 1.3300e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 103.2785 103.2785 5.2200e- 103.3882 003 004 004 003
Total 0.7127 9.9664 9.0536 0.0312 0.9361 0.1603 1.0964 0.2521 0.1474 0.3995 3,018.883 3,018.8836 0.0270 3,019.451 6 2
3.3 Removal of Bungalows - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0699 11.3458 5.2545 8.6900e- 0.6443 0.6443 0.5928 0.5928 889.7475 889.7475 0.2726 895.4725 003
Total 1.0699 11.3458 5.2545 8.6900e- 0.0000 0.6443 0.6443 0.0000 0.5928 0.5928 889.7475 889.7475 0.2726 895.4725 003
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0686 1.0527 0.8609 2.9400e- 0.0697 0.0157 0.0854 0.0191 0.0145 0.0335 292.0470 292.0470 2.1200e- 292.0915 003 003
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0305 0.0413 0.4314 1.0600e- 0.0894 7.2000e- 0.0901 0.0237 6.6000e- 0.0244 85.8277 85.8277 4.5000e- 85.9222 003 004 004 003
Total 0.0991 1.0940 1.2922 4.0000e- 0.1591 0.0164 0.1755 0.0428 0.0151 0.0579 377.8747 377.8747 6.6200e- 378.0137 003 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0699 11.3458 5.2545 8.6900e- 0.6443 0.6443 0.5928 0.5928 0.0000 889.7475 889.7475 0.2726 895.4725 003
Total 1.0699 11.3458 5.2545 8.6900e- 0.0000 0.6443 0.6443 0.0000 0.5928 0.5928 0.0000 889.7475 889.7475 0.2726 895.4725 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0686 1.0527 0.8609 2.9400e- 0.0697 0.0157 0.0854 0.0191 0.0145 0.0335 292.0470 292.0470 2.1200e- 292.0915 003 003
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0305 0.0413 0.4314 1.0600e- 0.0894 7.2000e- 0.0901 0.0237 6.6000e- 0.0244 85.8277 85.8277 4.5000e- 85.9222 003 004 004 003
Total 0.0991 1.0940 1.2922 4.0000e- 0.1591 0.0164 0.1755 0.0428 0.0151 0.0579 377.8747 377.8747 6.6200e- 378.0137 003 003
3.4 Shoring (Fields) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3833 17.0875 8.6845 0.0262 0.6951 0.6951 0.6395 0.6395 2,632.774 2,632.7747 0.8196 2,649.986 7 7
Total 1.3833 17.0875 8.6845 0.0262 0.6951 0.6951 0.6395 0.6395 2,632.774 2,632.7747 0.8196 2,649.986 7 7
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0343 0.0468 0.4880 1.3300e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 103.2785 103.2785 5.2200e- 103.3882 003 004 004 003
Total 0.0343 0.0468 0.4880 1.3300e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 103.2785 103.2785 5.2200e- 103.3882 003 004 004 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3833 17.0875 8.6845 0.0262 0.6951 0.6951 0.6395 0.6395 0.0000 2,632.774 2,632.7747 0.8196 2,649.986 7 7
Total 1.3833 17.0875 8.6845 0.0262 0.6951 0.6951 0.6395 0.6395 0.0000 2,632.774 2,632.7747 0.8196 2,649.986 7 7
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0343 0.0468 0.4880 1.3300e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 103.2785 103.2785 5.2200e- 103.3882 003 004 004 003
Total 0.0343 0.0468 0.4880 1.3300e- 0.1118 8.8000e- 0.1127 0.0296 8.1000e- 0.0305 103.2785 103.2785 5.2200e- 103.3882 003 004 004 003
3.5 Excavation - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 6.1293 0.0000 6.1293 3.3233 0.0000 3.3233 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.6894 51.7029 35.1091 0.0503 2.5591 2.5591 2.3543 2.3543 5,061.001 5,061.0016 1.5756 5,094.088 6 3
Total 4.6894 51.7029 35.1091 0.0503 6.1293 2.5591 8.6884 3.3233 2.3543 5.6776 5,061.001 5,061.0016 1.5756 5,094.088 6 3
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3557 5.2009 4.4909 0.0157 0.3710 0.0836 0.4546 0.1016 0.0769 0.1785 1,528.651 1,528.6516 0.0114 1,528.891 6 6
Vendor 7.8200e- 0.0744 0.1091 2.2000e- 6.2500e- 1.2000e- 7.4500e- 1.7800e- 1.1000e- 2.8800e- 20.9291 20.9291 1.6000e- 20.9323 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
Worker 0.0618 0.0843 0.8784 2.3900e- 0.2012 1.5800e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4600e- 0.0548 185.9013 185.9013 9.4000e- 186.0988 003 003 003 003
Total 0.4253 5.3595 5.4784 0.0183 0.5785 0.0864 0.6648 0.1567 0.0794 0.2362 1,735.482 1,735.4820 0.0210 1,735.922 0 7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.3904 0.0000 2.3904 1.2961 0.0000 1.2961 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.6894 51.7029 35.1091 0.0503 2.5591 2.5591 2.3543 2.3543 0.0000 5,061.001 5,061.0016 1.5756 5,094.088 6 3
Total 4.6894 51.7029 35.1091 0.0503 2.3904 2.5591 4.9495 1.2961 2.3543 3.6504 0.0000 5,061.001 5,061.0016 1.5756 5,094.088 6 3
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3557 5.2009 4.4909 0.0157 0.3710 0.0836 0.4546 0.1016 0.0769 0.1785 1,528.651 1,528.6516 0.0114 1,528.891 6 6
Vendor 7.8200e- 0.0744 0.1091 2.2000e- 6.2500e- 1.2000e- 7.4500e- 1.7800e- 1.1000e- 2.8800e- 20.9291 20.9291 1.6000e- 20.9323 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
Worker 0.0618 0.0843 0.8784 2.3900e- 0.2012 1.5800e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4600e- 0.0548 185.9013 185.9013 9.4000e- 186.0988 003 003 003 003
Total 0.4253 5.3595 5.4784 0.0183 0.5785 0.0864 0.6648 0.1567 0.0794 0.2362 1,735.482 1,735.4820 0.0210 1,735.922 0 7
3.6 Foundation (Gym) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4414 14.3984 10.8034 0.0231 0.7419 0.7419 0.7058 0.7058 2,268.376 2,268.3766 0.5489 2,279.903 6 1
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.4414 14.3984 10.8034 0.0231 0.7419 0.7419 0.7058 0.7058 2,268.376 2,268.3766 0.5489 2,279.903 6 1
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.5521 8.0730 6.9710 0.0243 0.5759 0.1297 0.7056 0.1577 0.1193 0.2770 2,372.829 2,372.8290 0.0178 2,373.201 0 7
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0446 0.0609 0.6344 1.7200e- 0.1453 1.1400e- 0.1465 0.0385 1.0500e- 0.0396 134.2621 134.2621 6.7900e- 134.4047 003 003 003 003
Total 0.5968 8.1338 7.6054 0.0260 0.7212 0.1309 0.8520 0.1962 0.1204 0.3166 2,507.091 2,507.0911 0.0245 2,507.606 1 3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4414 14.3984 10.8034 0.0231 0.7419 0.7419 0.7058 0.7058 0.0000 2,268.376 2,268.3766 0.5489 2,279.903 6 1 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.4414 14.3984 10.8034 0.0231 0.7419 0.7419 0.7058 0.7058 0.0000 2,268.376 2,268.3766 0.5489 2,279.903 6 1
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.5521 8.0730 6.9710 0.0243 0.5759 0.1297 0.7056 0.1577 0.1193 0.2770 2,372.829 2,372.8290 0.0178 2,373.201 0 7
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0446 0.0609 0.6344 1.7200e- 0.1453 1.1400e- 0.1465 0.0385 1.0500e- 0.0396 134.2621 134.2621 6.7900e- 134.4047 003 003 003 003
Total 0.5968 8.1338 7.6054 0.0260 0.7212 0.1309 0.8520 0.1962 0.1204 0.3166 2,507.091 2,507.0911 0.0245 2,507.606 1 3
3.7 Building Construction (Gym) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.6842 19.0722 14.0147 0.0210 1.1927 1.1927 1.1245 1.1245 1,964.602 1,964.6028 0.5372 1,975.884 8 4
Total 2.6842 19.0722 14.0147 0.0210 1.1927 1.1927 1.1245 1.1245 1,964.602 1,964.6028 0.5372 1,975.884 8 4 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1173 1.1156 1.6360 3.2300e- 0.0938 0.0180 0.1117 0.0267 0.0165 0.0432 313.9359 313.9359 2.3300e- 313.9848 003 003
Worker 0.1339 0.1826 1.9032 5.1700e- 0.4359 3.4100e- 0.4393 0.1156 3.1600e- 0.1188 402.7862 402.7862 0.0204 403.2140 003 003 003
Total 0.2512 1.2982 3.5392 8.4000e- 0.5297 0.0214 0.5511 0.1423 0.0197 0.1620 716.7221 716.7221 0.0227 717.1988 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.6842 19.0722 14.0147 0.0210 1.1927 1.1927 1.1245 1.1245 0.0000 1,964.602 1,964.6028 0.5372 1,975.884 8 4
Total 2.6842 19.0722 14.0147 0.0210 1.1927 1.1927 1.1245 1.1245 0.0000 1,964.602 1,964.6028 0.5372 1,975.884 8 4
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1173 1.1156 1.6360 3.2300e- 0.0938 0.0180 0.1117 0.0267 0.0165 0.0432 313.9359 313.9359 2.3300e- 313.9848 003 003
Worker 0.1339 0.1826 1.9032 5.1700e- 0.4359 3.4100e- 0.4393 0.1156 3.1600e- 0.1188 402.7862 402.7862 0.0204 403.2140 003 003 003
Total 0.2512 1.2982 3.5392 8.4000e- 0.5297 0.0214 0.5511 0.1423 0.0197 0.1620 716.7221 716.7221 0.0227 717.1988 003
3.7 Building Construction (Gym) - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.3613 17.3721 13.5502 0.0210 1.0361 1.0361 0.9771 0.9771 1,942.783 1,942.7830 0.5218 1,953.740 0 7
Total 2.3613 17.3721 13.5502 0.0210 1.0361 1.0361 0.9771 0.9771 1,942.783 1,942.7830 0.5218 1,953.740 0 7
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1109 1.0286 1.5822 3.2200e- 0.0938 0.0170 0.1108 0.0267 0.0157 0.0424 307.8065 307.8065 2.2900e- 307.8545 003 003 Worker 0.1231 0.1675 1.7443 5.1600e- 0.4359 3.3500e- 0.4393 0.1156 3.1100e- 0.1187 387.4521 387.4521 0.0191 387.8526 003 003 003
Total 0.2340 1.1960 3.3265 8.3800e- 0.5297 0.0204 0.5501 0.1423 0.0188 0.1611 695.2586 695.2586 0.0214 695.7071 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.3613 17.3721 13.5502 0.0210 1.0361 1.0361 0.9771 0.9771 0.0000 1,942.783 1,942.7830 0.5218 1,953.740 0 7
Total 2.3613 17.3721 13.5502 0.0210 1.0361 1.0361 0.9771 0.9771 0.0000 1,942.783 1,942.7830 0.5218 1,953.740 0 7
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1109 1.0286 1.5822 3.2200e- 0.0938 0.0170 0.1108 0.0267 0.0157 0.0424 307.8065 307.8065 2.2900e- 307.8545 003 003
Worker 0.1231 0.1675 1.7443 5.1600e- 0.4359 3.3500e- 0.4393 0.1156 3.1100e- 0.1187 387.4521 387.4521 0.0191 387.8526 003 003 003
Total 0.2340 1.1960 3.3265 8.3800e- 0.5297 0.0204 0.5501 0.1423 0.0188 0.1611 695.2586 695.2586 0.0214 695.7071 003
3.8 Architectural Coating (Gym) - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 36.1376 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.5930 4.6758 5.2958 8.4200e- 0.2822 0.2822 0.2802 0.2802 808.2886 808.2886 0.1252 810.9174 003
Total 36.7306 4.6758 5.2958 8.4200e- 0.2822 0.2822 0.2802 0.2802 808.2886 808.2886 0.1252 810.9174 003
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3409 4.7955 4.3565 0.0154 0.3660 0.0824 0.4484 0.1002 0.0758 0.1761 1,478.408 1,478.4082 0.0112 1,478.643 2 6
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0253 0.0344 0.3578 1.0600e- 0.0894 6.9000e- 0.0901 0.0237 6.4000e- 0.0244 79.4774 79.4774 3.9100e- 79.5595 003 004 004 003
Total 0.3661 4.8298 4.7143 0.0165 0.4554 0.0831 0.5385 0.1239 0.0765 0.2004 1,557.885 1,557.8855 0.0151 1,558.203 5 1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 36.1376 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.5930 4.6758 5.2958 8.4200e- 0.2822 0.2822 0.2802 0.2802 0.0000 808.2886 808.2886 0.1252 810.9174 003
Total 36.7306 4.6758 5.2958 8.4200e- 0.2822 0.2822 0.2802 0.2802 0.0000 808.2886 808.2886 0.1252 810.9174 003
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3409 4.7955 4.3565 0.0154 0.3660 0.0824 0.4484 0.1002 0.0758 0.1761 1,478.408 1,478.4082 0.0112 1,478.643 2 6
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0253 0.0344 0.3578 1.0600e- 0.0894 6.9000e- 0.0901 0.0237 6.4000e- 0.0244 79.4774 79.4774 3.9100e- 79.5595 003 004 004 003
Total 0.3661 4.8298 4.7143 0.0165 0.4554 0.0831 0.5385 0.1239 0.0765 0.2004 1,557.885 1,557.8855 0.0151 1,558.203 5 1
3.9 Paving - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4846 15.3035 14.6735 0.0230 0.8238 0.8238 0.7591 0.7591 2,259.489 2,259.4895 0.7041 2,274.276 5 4
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.4846 15.3035 14.6735 0.0230 0.8238 0.8238 0.7591 0.7591 2,259.489 2,259.4895 0.7041 2,274.276 5 4
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0568 0.0773 0.8050 2.3800e- 0.2012 1.5500e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4300e- 0.0548 178.8240 178.8240 8.8000e- 179.0089 003 003 003 003
Total 0.0568 0.0773 0.8050 2.3800e- 0.2012 1.5500e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4300e- 0.0548 178.8240 178.8240 8.8000e- 179.0089 003 003 003 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4846 15.3035 14.6735 0.0230 0.8238 0.8238 0.7591 0.7591 0.0000 2,259.489 2,259.4895 0.7041 2,274.276 5 4
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.4846 15.3035 14.6735 0.0230 0.8238 0.8238 0.7591 0.7591 0.0000 2,259.489 2,259.4895 0.7041 2,274.276 5 4
Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0568 0.0773 0.8050 2.3800e- 0.2012 1.5500e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4300e- 0.0548 178.8240 178.8240 8.8000e- 179.0089 003 003 003 003
Total 0.0568 0.0773 0.8050 2.3800e- 0.2012 1.5500e- 0.2028 0.0534 1.4300e- 0.0548 178.8240 178.8240 8.8000e- 179.0089 003 003 003 003 LAUSD, Berendo Middle School Appendix B, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data Worksheets
B.1 Construction Emissions . Construction: CalEEMod Output (Annual)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 11/3/2016 1:47 PM
Berendo MS Construction South Coast Air Basin, Annual
1.0 Project Characteristics
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Junior High School 50.00 1000sqft 1.15 50,000.00 0
City Park 1.00 Acre 1.00 43,560.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31
Climate Zone 11 Operational Year 2019
Utility Company Los Angeles Department of Water & Power
CO2 Intensity 1227.89 CH4 Intensity 0.029 N2O Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction Phase - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" (1 Tractor/Loader Backhoe added for retaining wall) Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Off-road Equipment - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Trips and VMT - Vendor Trip added in Excavation Phase for retaining wall. Demolition - Grading - See "Berendo Construction Assumptions" Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 60.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 220.00 235.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 28.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6.00 31.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 21.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 21.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 3.00 5.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 6/17/2019 3/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 4/23/2019 3/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 2/7/2018 12/31/2017
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 1/15/2018 2/15/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/26/2019 1/1/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/31/2018 4/1/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/26/2019 2/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 2/1/2018 12/24/2017
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 1/1/2018 2/1/2018
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 46.50 2.15
tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 9,240.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 3.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 3.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 0.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 0.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 0.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment PhaseName Excavation
tblOffRoadEquipment PhaseName Excavation
tblOffRoadEquipment PhaseName Excavation
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 6.00 8.00
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2019
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 1,545.00 1,137.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 20.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 1,155.00 660.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 694.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 1,260.00
tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 1.00 2.0 Emissions Summary
2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2017 0.0114 0.1204 0.0888 1.7000e- 0.0383 5.6900e- 0.0440 6.6600e- 5.3600e- 0.0120 0.0000 15.3333 15.3333 1.7800e- 0.0000 15.3708 004 003 003 003 003
2018 0.3995 3.3744 2.7245 4.9500e- 0.3053 0.1766 0.4818 0.0920 0.1656 0.2575 0.0000 424.8334 424.8334 0.0816 0.0000 426.5476 003
2019 1.2064 1.0070 0.9669 1.9000e- 0.0311 0.0513 0.0824 8.4100e- 0.0486 0.0570 0.0000 159.7407 159.7407 0.0254 0.0000 160.2738 003 003
Total 1.6174 4.5017 3.7802 7.0200e- 0.3747 0.2336 0.6083 0.1071 0.2195 0.3265 0.0000 599.9073 599.9073 0.1088 0.0000 602.1922 003
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2017 0.0114 0.1204 0.0888 1.7000e- 0.0201 5.6900e- 0.0258 3.9000e- 5.3600e- 9.2600e- 0.0000 15.3333 15.3333 1.7800e- 0.0000 15.3707 004 003 003 003 003 003
2018 0.3995 3.3744 2.7245 4.9500e- 0.1636 0.1766 0.3401 0.0479 0.1656 0.2134 0.0000 424.8330 424.8330 0.0816 0.0000 426.5473 003
2019 1.2064 1.0070 0.9669 1.9000e- 0.0311 0.0513 0.0824 8.4100e- 0.0486 0.0570 0.0000 159.7406 159.7406 0.0254 0.0000 160.2737 003 003
Total 1.6174 4.5017 3.7802 7.0200e- 0.2148 0.2336 0.4483 0.0602 0.2195 0.2797 0.0000 599.9069 599.9069 0.1088 0.0000 602.1917 003
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.68 0.00 26.29 43.78 0.00 14.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reduction
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Num Days Phase Description Number Week
1 Demolition (Gym) Demolition 12/24/2017 1/31/2018 5 28
2 Removal of Bungalows Site Preparation 12/24/2017 12/31/2017 5 5
3 Shoring (Fields) Trenching 2/1/2018 2/15/2018 5 11
4 Excavation Grading 2/16/2018 3/30/2018 5 31
5 Foundation (Gym) Paving 4/1/2018 4/30/2018 5 21
6 Building Construction (Gym) Building Construction 5/1/2018 3/25/2019 5 235
7 Architectural Coating (Gym) Architectural Coating 1/1/2019 3/25/2019 5 60
8 Paving Paving 2/25/2019 3/25/2019 5 21
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 140,340; Non-Residential Outdoor: 46,780 (Architectural Coating –
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition (Gym) Concrete/Industrial Saws 2 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition (Gym) Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40
Demolition (Gym) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Removal of Bungalows Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Removal of Bungalows Forklifts 2 8.00 89 0.20
Removal of Bungalows Graders 0 8.00 174 0.41
Removal of Bungalows Scrapers 0 8.00 361 0.48 Removal of Bungalows Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 7.00 97 0.37
Shoring (Fields) Bore/Drill Rigs 2 8.00 205 0.50
Shoring (Fields) Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Shoring (Fields) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Excavation Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Excavation Excavators 1 8.00 162 0.38
Excavation Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41
Excavation Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40
Excavation Scrapers 1 8.00 361 0.48
Excavation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Foundation (Gym) Bore/Drill Rigs 1 8.00 205 0.50
Foundation (Gym) Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56
Foundation (Gym) Pavers 1 8.00 125 0.42
Foundation (Gym) Paving Equipment 0 8.00 130 0.36
Foundation (Gym) Pumps 1 8.00 84 0.74
Foundation (Gym) Rollers 1 8.00 80 0.38
Foundation (Gym) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction (Gym) Cranes 1 8.00 226 0.29
Building Construction (Gym) Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction (Gym) Generator Sets 0 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction (Gym) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction (Gym) Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating (Gym) Aerial Lifts 2 6.00 62 0.31
Architectural Coating (Gym) Air Compressors 2 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 125 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 130 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Vehicle Vendor Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class
Demolition (Gym) 4 10.00 0.00 1,137.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Removal of Bungalows 3 8.00 0.00 20.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Shoring (Fields) 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Excavation 7 18.00 1.00 660.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Foundation (Gym) 5 13.00 0.00 694.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 8 39.00 15.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT (Gym) Architectural Coating 4 8.00 0.00 1,260.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT (Gym) Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
3.2 Demolition (Gym) - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0299 0.0000 0.0299 4.5200e- 0.0000 4.5200e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003 003
Off-Road 6.6700e- 0.0619 0.0496 6.0000e- 3.6400e- 3.6400e- 3.4700e- 3.4700e- 0.0000 5.4740 5.4740 1.0900e- 0.0000 5.4969 003 005 003 003 003 003 003
Total 6.6700e- 0.0619 0.0496 6.0000e- 0.0299 3.6400e- 0.0335 4.5200e- 3.4700e- 7.9900e- 0.0000 5.4740 5.4740 1.0900e- 0.0000 5.4969 003 005 003 003 003 003 003 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.7200e- 0.0272 0.0214 7.0000e- 7.7800e- 4.0000e- 8.1800e- 1.9600e- 3.7000e- 2.3300e- 0.0000 6.7333 6.7333 5.0000e- 0.0000 6.7344 003 005 003 004 003 003 004 003 005
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 9.0000e- 1.3000e- 1.3800e- 0.0000 2.7000e- 0.0000 2.8000e- 7.0000e- 0.0000 7.0000e- 0.0000 0.2471 0.2471 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.2474 005 004 003 004 004 005 005 005
Total 1.8100e- 0.0273 0.0228 7.0000e- 8.0500e- 4.0000e- 8.4600e- 2.0300e- 3.7000e- 2.4000e- 0.0000 6.9805 6.9805 6.0000e- 0.0000 6.9817 003 005 003 004 003 003 004 003 005
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0116 0.0000 0.0116 1.7600e- 0.0000 1.7600e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003 003
Off-Road 6.6700e- 0.0619 0.0496 6.0000e- 3.6400e- 3.6400e- 3.4700e- 3.4700e- 0.0000 5.4740 5.4740 1.0900e- 0.0000 5.4968 003 005 003 003 003 003 003
Total 6.6700e- 0.0619 0.0496 6.0000e- 0.0116 3.6400e- 0.0153 1.7600e- 3.4700e- 5.2300e- 0.0000 5.4740 5.4740 1.0900e- 0.0000 5.4968 003 005 003 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.7200e- 0.0272 0.0214 7.0000e- 7.7800e- 4.0000e- 8.1800e- 1.9600e- 3.7000e- 2.3300e- 0.0000 6.7333 6.7333 5.0000e- 0.0000 6.7344 003 005 003 004 003 003 004 003 005
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 9.0000e- 1.3000e- 1.3800e- 0.0000 2.7000e- 0.0000 2.8000e- 7.0000e- 0.0000 7.0000e- 0.0000 0.2471 0.2471 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.2474 005 004 003 004 004 005 005 005
Total 1.8100e- 0.0273 0.0228 7.0000e- 8.0500e- 4.0000e- 8.4600e- 2.0300e- 3.7000e- 2.4000e- 0.0000 6.9805 6.9805 6.0000e- 0.0000 6.9817 003 005 003 004 003 003 004 003 005
3.2 Demolition (Gym) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.1373 0.0000 0.1373 0.0208 0.0000 0.0208 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0274 0.2548 0.2156 2.8000e- 0.0145 0.0145 0.0138 0.0138 0.0000 24.9791 24.9791 4.8800e- 0.0000 25.0817 004 003
Total 0.0274 0.2548 0.2156 2.8000e- 0.1373 0.0145 0.1518 0.0208 0.0138 0.0346 0.0000 24.9791 24.9791 4.8800e- 0.0000 25.0817 004 003 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 7.7000e- 0.1160 0.0966 3.4000e- 9.3200e- 1.8300e- 0.0112 2.5200e- 1.6800e- 4.2000e- 0.0000 30.4595 30.4595 2.3000e- 0.0000 30.4642 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 004
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 3.7000e- 5.5000e- 5.7600e- 2.0000e- 1.2600e- 1.0000e- 1.2700e- 3.4000e- 1.0000e- 3.4000e- 0.0000 1.0943 1.0943 5.0000e- 0.0000 1.0954 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005
Total 8.0700e- 0.1166 0.1024 3.6000e- 0.0106 1.8400e- 0.0124 2.8600e- 1.6900e- 4.5400e- 0.0000 31.5537 31.5537 2.8000e- 0.0000 31.5596 003 004 003 003 003 003 004
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0536 0.0000 0.0536 8.1100e- 0.0000 8.1100e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 003 003
Off-Road 0.0274 0.2548 0.2156 2.8000e- 0.0145 0.0145 0.0138 0.0138 0.0000 24.9791 24.9791 4.8800e- 0.0000 25.0817 004 003
Total 0.0274 0.2548 0.2156 2.8000e- 0.0536 0.0145 0.0681 8.1100e- 0.0138 0.0219 0.0000 24.9791 24.9791 4.8800e- 0.0000 25.0817 004 003 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 7.7000e- 0.1160 0.0966 3.4000e- 9.3200e- 1.8300e- 0.0112 2.5200e- 1.6800e- 4.2000e- 0.0000 30.4595 30.4595 2.3000e- 0.0000 30.4642 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 004
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 3.7000e- 5.5000e- 5.7600e- 2.0000e- 1.2600e- 1.0000e- 1.2700e- 3.4000e- 1.0000e- 3.4000e- 0.0000 1.0943 1.0943 5.0000e- 0.0000 1.0954 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005
Total 8.0700e- 0.1166 0.1024 3.6000e- 0.0106 1.8400e- 0.0124 2.8600e- 1.6900e- 4.5400e- 0.0000 31.5537 31.5537 2.8000e- 0.0000 31.5596 003 004 003 003 003 003 004
3.3 Removal of Bungalows - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.6700e- 0.0284 0.0131 2.0000e- 1.6100e- 1.6100e- 1.4800e- 1.4800e- 0.0000 2.0179 2.0179 6.2000e- 0.0000 2.0309 003 005 003 003 003 003 004
Total 2.6700e- 0.0284 0.0131 2.0000e- 0.0000 1.6100e- 1.6100e- 0.0000 1.4800e- 1.4800e- 0.0000 2.0179 2.0179 6.2000e- 0.0000 2.0309 003 005 003 003 003 003 004 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.7000e- 2.6800e- 2.1100e- 1.0000e- 1.7000e- 4.0000e- 2.1000e- 5.0000e- 4.0000e- 8.0000e- 0.0000 0.6633 0.6633 0.0000 0.0000 0.6634 004 003 003 005 004 005 004 005 005 005
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 7.0000e- 1.1000e- 1.1100e- 0.0000 2.2000e- 0.0000 2.2000e- 6.0000e- 0.0000 6.0000e- 0.0000 0.1977 0.1977 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.1979 005 004 003 004 004 005 005 005
Total 2.4000e- 2.7900e- 3.2200e- 1.0000e- 3.9000e- 4.0000e- 4.3000e- 1.1000e- 4.0000e- 1.4000e- 0.0000 0.8610 0.8610 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.8613 004 003 003 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.6700e- 0.0284 0.0131 2.0000e- 1.6100e- 1.6100e- 1.4800e- 1.4800e- 0.0000 2.0179 2.0179 6.2000e- 0.0000 2.0309 003 005 003 003 003 003 004
Total 2.6700e- 0.0284 0.0131 2.0000e- 0.0000 1.6100e- 1.6100e- 0.0000 1.4800e- 1.4800e- 0.0000 2.0179 2.0179 6.2000e- 0.0000 2.0309 003 005 003 003 003 003 004 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.7000e- 2.6800e- 2.1100e- 1.0000e- 1.7000e- 4.0000e- 2.1000e- 5.0000e- 4.0000e- 8.0000e- 0.0000 0.6633 0.6633 0.0000 0.0000 0.6634 004 003 003 005 004 005 004 005 005 005
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 7.0000e- 1.1000e- 1.1100e- 0.0000 2.2000e- 0.0000 2.2000e- 6.0000e- 0.0000 6.0000e- 0.0000 0.1977 0.1977 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.1979 005 004 003 004 004 005 005 005
Total 2.4000e- 2.7900e- 3.2200e- 1.0000e- 3.9000e- 4.0000e- 4.3000e- 1.1000e- 4.0000e- 1.4000e- 0.0000 0.8610 0.8610 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.8613 004 003 003 005 004 005 004 004 005 004 005
3.4 Shoring (Fields) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 7.6100e- 0.0940 0.0478 1.4000e- 3.8200e- 3.8200e- 3.5200e- 3.5200e- 0.0000 13.1363 13.1363 4.0900e- 0.0000 13.2222 003 004 003 003 003 003 003
Total 7.6100e- 0.0940 0.0478 1.4000e- 3.8200e- 3.8200e- 3.5200e- 3.5200e- 0.0000 13.1363 13.1363 4.0900e- 0.0000 13.2222 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.8000e- 2.7000e- 2.7500e- 1.0000e- 6.0000e- 0.0000 6.1000e- 1.6000e- 0.0000 1.6000e- 0.0000 0.5234 0.5234 3.0000e- 0.0000 0.5239 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005
Total 1.8000e- 2.7000e- 2.7500e- 1.0000e- 6.0000e- 0.0000 6.1000e- 1.6000e- 0.0000 1.6000e- 0.0000 0.5234 0.5234 3.0000e- 0.0000 0.5239 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 7.6100e- 0.0940 0.0478 1.4000e- 3.8200e- 3.8200e- 3.5200e- 3.5200e- 0.0000 13.1363 13.1363 4.0900e- 0.0000 13.2221 003 004 003 003 003 003 003
Total 7.6100e- 0.0940 0.0478 1.4000e- 3.8200e- 3.8200e- 3.5200e- 3.5200e- 0.0000 13.1363 13.1363 4.0900e- 0.0000 13.2221 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.8000e- 2.7000e- 2.7500e- 1.0000e- 6.0000e- 0.0000 6.1000e- 1.6000e- 0.0000 1.6000e- 0.0000 0.5234 0.5234 3.0000e- 0.0000 0.5239 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005
Total 1.8000e- 2.7000e- 2.7500e- 1.0000e- 6.0000e- 0.0000 6.1000e- 1.6000e- 0.0000 1.6000e- 0.0000 0.5234 0.5234 3.0000e- 0.0000 0.5239 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005
3.5 Excavation - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0950 0.0000 0.0950 0.0515 0.0000 0.0515 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0727 0.8014 0.5442 7.8000e- 0.0397 0.0397 0.0365 0.0365 0.0000 71.1646 71.1646 0.0222 0.0000 71.6298 004
Total 0.0727 0.8014 0.5442 7.8000e- 0.0950 0.0397 0.1347 0.0515 0.0365 0.0880 0.0000 71.1646 71.1646 0.0222 0.0000 71.6298 004 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 5.4400e- 0.0820 0.0683 2.4000e- 5.6600e- 1.2900e- 6.9500e- 1.5500e- 1.1900e- 2.7400e- 0.0000 21.5246 21.5246 1.6000e- 0.0000 21.5280 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
Vendor 1.2000e- 1.1800e- 1.6400e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 2.0000e- 1.1000e- 3.0000e- 2.0000e- 4.0000e- 0.0000 0.2957 0.2957 0.0000 0.0000 0.2958 004 003 003 004 005 004 005 005 005
Worker 9.0000e- 1.3500e- 0.0140 4.0000e- 3.0600e- 2.0000e- 3.0900e- 8.1000e- 2.0000e- 8.4000e- 0.0000 2.6548 2.6548 1.3000e- 0.0000 2.6576 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 004
Total 6.4600e- 0.0845 0.0839 2.8000e- 8.8200e- 1.3300e- 0.0102 2.3900e- 1.2300e- 3.6200e- 0.0000 24.4752 24.4752 2.9000e- 0.0000 24.4814 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 004
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0371 0.0000 0.0371 0.0201 0.0000 0.0201 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0727 0.8014 0.5442 7.8000e- 0.0397 0.0397 0.0365 0.0365 0.0000 71.1645 71.1645 0.0222 0.0000 71.6297 004
Total 0.0727 0.8014 0.5442 7.8000e- 0.0371 0.0397 0.0767 0.0201 0.0365 0.0566 0.0000 71.1645 71.1645 0.0222 0.0000 71.6297 004 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 5.4400e- 0.0820 0.0683 2.4000e- 5.6600e- 1.2900e- 6.9500e- 1.5500e- 1.1900e- 2.7400e- 0.0000 21.5246 21.5246 1.6000e- 0.0000 21.5280 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
Vendor 1.2000e- 1.1800e- 1.6400e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 2.0000e- 1.1000e- 3.0000e- 2.0000e- 4.0000e- 0.0000 0.2957 0.2957 0.0000 0.0000 0.2958 004 003 003 004 005 004 005 005 005
Worker 9.0000e- 1.3500e- 0.0140 4.0000e- 3.0600e- 2.0000e- 3.0900e- 8.1000e- 2.0000e- 8.4000e- 0.0000 2.6548 2.6548 1.3000e- 0.0000 2.6576 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 004
Total 6.4600e- 0.0845 0.0839 2.8000e- 8.8200e- 1.3300e- 0.0102 2.3900e- 1.2300e- 3.6200e- 0.0000 24.4752 24.4752 2.9000e- 0.0000 24.4814 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 004
3.6 Foundation (Gym) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0151 0.1512 0.1134 2.4000e- 7.7900e- 7.7900e- 7.4100e- 7.4100e- 0.0000 21.6073 21.6073 5.2300e- 0.0000 21.7171 004 003 003 003 003 003
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0151 0.1512 0.1134 2.4000e- 7.7900e- 7.7900e- 7.4100e- 7.4100e- 0.0000 21.6073 21.6073 5.2300e- 0.0000 21.7171 004 003 003 003 003 003 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 5.7200e- 0.0862 0.0718 2.6000e- 5.9500e- 1.3600e- 7.3100e- 1.6300e- 1.2500e- 2.8800e- 0.0000 22.6335 22.6335 1.7000e- 0.0000 22.6370 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.4000e- 6.6000e- 6.8300e- 2.0000e- 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.5100e- 4.0000e- 1.0000e- 4.1000e- 0.0000 1.2989 1.2989 6.0000e- 0.0000 1.3002 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005
Total 6.1600e- 0.0869 0.0786 2.8000e- 7.4500e- 1.3700e- 8.8200e- 2.0300e- 1.2600e- 3.2900e- 0.0000 23.9324 23.9324 2.3000e- 0.0000 23.9372 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0151 0.1512 0.1134 2.4000e- 7.7900e- 7.7900e- 7.4100e- 7.4100e- 0.0000 21.6073 21.6073 5.2300e- 0.0000 21.7171 004 003 003 003 003 003
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0151 0.1512 0.1134 2.4000e- 7.7900e- 7.7900e- 7.4100e- 7.4100e- 0.0000 21.6073 21.6073 5.2300e- 0.0000 21.7171 004 003 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 5.7200e- 0.0862 0.0718 2.6000e- 5.9500e- 1.3600e- 7.3100e- 1.6300e- 1.2500e- 2.8800e- 0.0000 22.6335 22.6335 1.7000e- 0.0000 22.6370 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.4000e- 6.6000e- 6.8300e- 2.0000e- 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.5100e- 4.0000e- 1.0000e- 4.1000e- 0.0000 1.2989 1.2989 6.0000e- 0.0000 1.3002 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005
Total 6.1600e- 0.0869 0.0786 2.8000e- 7.4500e- 1.3700e- 8.8200e- 2.0300e- 1.2600e- 3.2900e- 0.0000 23.9324 23.9324 2.3000e- 0.0000 23.9372 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
3.7 Building Construction (Gym) - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.2349 1.6688 1.2263 1.8400e- 0.1044 0.1044 0.0984 0.0984 0.0000 155.9475 155.9475 0.0426 0.0000 156.8431 003
Total 0.2349 1.6688 1.2263 1.8400e- 0.1044 0.1044 0.0984 0.0984 0.0000 155.9475 155.9475 0.0426 0.0000 156.8431 003 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 9.9900e- 0.0995 0.1389 2.8000e- 8.0800e- 1.5600e- 9.6400e- 2.3100e- 1.4400e- 3.7400e- 0.0000 25.0425 25.0425 1.8000e- 0.0000 25.0463 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
Worker 0.0110 0.0165 0.1708 4.6000e- 0.0374 3.0000e- 0.0377 9.9400e- 2.8000e- 0.0102 0.0000 32.4714 32.4714 1.6200e- 0.0000 32.5054 004 004 003 004 003
Total 0.0210 0.1160 0.3097 7.4000e- 0.0455 1.8600e- 0.0474 0.0123 1.7200e- 0.0140 0.0000 57.5139 57.5139 1.8000e- 0.0000 57.5517 004 003 003 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.2349 1.6688 1.2263 1.8400e- 0.1044 0.1044 0.0984 0.0984 0.0000 155.9474 155.9474 0.0426 0.0000 156.8429 003
Total 0.2349 1.6688 1.2263 1.8400e- 0.1044 0.1044 0.0984 0.0984 0.0000 155.9474 155.9474 0.0426 0.0000 156.8429 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 9.9900e- 0.0995 0.1389 2.8000e- 8.0800e- 1.5600e- 9.6400e- 2.3100e- 1.4400e- 3.7400e- 0.0000 25.0425 25.0425 1.8000e- 0.0000 25.0463 003 004 003 003 003 003 003 003 004
Worker 0.0110 0.0165 0.1708 4.6000e- 0.0374 3.0000e- 0.0377 9.9400e- 2.8000e- 0.0102 0.0000 32.4714 32.4714 1.6200e- 0.0000 32.5054 004 004 003 004 003
Total 0.0210 0.1160 0.3097 7.4000e- 0.0455 1.8600e- 0.0474 0.0123 1.7200e- 0.0140 0.0000 57.5139 57.5139 1.8000e- 0.0000 57.5517 004 003 003 003
3.7 Building Construction (Gym) - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0708 0.5212 0.4065 6.3000e- 0.0311 0.0311 0.0293 0.0293 0.0000 52.8739 52.8739 0.0142 0.0000 53.1721 004
Total 0.0708 0.5212 0.4065 6.3000e- 0.0311 0.0311 0.0293 0.0293 0.0000 52.8739 52.8739 0.0142 0.0000 53.1721 004 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 3.2400e- 0.0315 0.0460 1.0000e- 2.7700e- 5.1000e- 3.2800e- 7.9000e- 4.7000e- 1.2600e- 0.0000 8.4186 8.4186 6.0000e- 0.0000 8.4198 003 004 003 004 003 004 004 003 005
Worker 3.4700e- 5.1700e- 0.0537 1.6000e- 0.0128 1.0000e- 0.0129 3.4100e- 9.0000e- 3.5000e- 0.0000 10.7093 10.7093 5.2000e- 0.0000 10.7202 003 003 004 004 003 005 003 004
Total 6.7100e- 0.0366 0.0997 2.6000e- 0.0156 6.1000e- 0.0162 4.2000e- 5.6000e- 4.7600e- 0.0000 19.1279 19.1279 5.8000e- 0.0000 19.1401 003 004 004 003 004 003 004
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0708 0.5212 0.4065 6.3000e- 0.0311 0.0311 0.0293 0.0293 0.0000 52.8738 52.8738 0.0142 0.0000 53.1721 004
Total 0.0708 0.5212 0.4065 6.3000e- 0.0311 0.0311 0.0293 0.0293 0.0000 52.8738 52.8738 0.0142 0.0000 53.1721 004 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 3.2400e- 0.0315 0.0460 1.0000e- 2.7700e- 5.1000e- 3.2800e- 7.9000e- 4.7000e- 1.2600e- 0.0000 8.4186 8.4186 6.0000e- 0.0000 8.4198 003 004 003 004 003 004 004 003 005
Worker 3.4700e- 5.1700e- 0.0537 1.6000e- 0.0128 1.0000e- 0.0129 3.4100e- 9.0000e- 3.5000e- 0.0000 10.7093 10.7093 5.2000e- 0.0000 10.7202 003 003 004 004 003 005 003 004
Total 6.7100e- 0.0366 0.0997 2.6000e- 0.0156 6.1000e- 0.0162 4.2000e- 5.6000e- 4.7600e- 0.0000 19.1279 19.1279 5.8000e- 0.0000 19.1401 003 004 004 003 004 003 004
3.8 Architectural Coating (Gym) - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 1.0841 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0178 0.1403 0.1589 2.5000e- 8.4700e- 8.4700e- 8.4100e- 8.4100e- 0.0000 21.9980 21.9980 3.4100e- 0.0000 22.0696 004 003 003 003 003 003
Total 1.1019 0.1403 0.1589 2.5000e- 8.4700e- 8.4700e- 8.4100e- 8.4100e- 0.0000 21.9980 21.9980 3.4100e- 0.0000 22.0696 004 003 003 003 003 003 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0101 0.1463 0.1281 4.6000e- 0.0108 2.4700e- 0.0133 2.9600e- 2.2700e- 5.2400e- 0.0000 40.2915 40.2915 3.0000e- 0.0000 40.2979 004 003 003 003 003 004
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 7.1000e- 1.0600e- 0.0110 3.0000e- 2.6300e- 2.0000e- 2.6500e- 7.0000e- 2.0000e- 7.2000e- 0.0000 2.1968 2.1968 1.1000e- 0.0000 2.1990 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 004
Total 0.0108 0.1474 0.1391 4.9000e- 0.0134 2.4900e- 0.0159 3.6600e- 2.2900e- 5.9600e- 0.0000 42.4883 42.4883 4.1000e- 0.0000 42.4969 004 003 003 003 003 004
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 1.0841 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0178 0.1403 0.1589 2.5000e- 8.4700e- 8.4700e- 8.4100e- 8.4100e- 0.0000 21.9980 21.9980 3.4100e- 0.0000 22.0695 004 003 003 003 003 003
Total 1.1019 0.1403 0.1589 2.5000e- 8.4700e- 8.4700e- 8.4100e- 8.4100e- 0.0000 21.9980 21.9980 3.4100e- 0.0000 22.0695 004 003 003 003 003 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0101 0.1463 0.1281 4.6000e- 0.0108 2.4700e- 0.0133 2.9600e- 2.2700e- 5.2400e- 0.0000 40.2915 40.2915 3.0000e- 0.0000 40.2979 004 003 003 003 003 004
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 7.1000e- 1.0600e- 0.0110 3.0000e- 2.6300e- 2.0000e- 2.6500e- 7.0000e- 2.0000e- 7.2000e- 0.0000 2.1968 2.1968 1.1000e- 0.0000 2.1990 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 004
Total 0.0108 0.1474 0.1391 4.9000e- 0.0134 2.4900e- 0.0159 3.6600e- 2.2900e- 5.9600e- 0.0000 42.4883 42.4883 4.1000e- 0.0000 42.4969 004 003 003 003 003 004
3.9 Paving - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0156 0.1607 0.1541 2.4000e- 8.6500e- 8.6500e- 7.9700e- 7.9700e- 0.0000 21.5226 21.5226 6.7100e- 0.0000 21.6635 004 003 003 003 003 003
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0156 0.1607 0.1541 2.4000e- 8.6500e- 8.6500e- 7.9700e- 7.9700e- 0.0000 21.5226 21.5226 6.7100e- 0.0000 21.6635 004 003 003 003 003 003 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 5.6000e- 8.4000e- 8.6700e- 3.0000e- 2.0700e- 2.0000e- 2.0900e- 5.5000e- 2.0000e- 5.7000e- 0.0000 1.7300 1.7300 8.0000e- 0.0000 1.7317 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005
Total 5.6000e- 8.4000e- 8.6700e- 3.0000e- 2.0700e- 2.0000e- 2.0900e- 5.5000e- 2.0000e- 5.7000e- 0.0000 1.7300 1.7300 8.0000e- 0.0000 1.7317 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0156 0.1607 0.1541 2.4000e- 8.6500e- 8.6500e- 7.9700e- 7.9700e- 0.0000 21.5226 21.5226 6.7100e- 0.0000 21.6635 004 003 003 003 003 003
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0156 0.1607 0.1541 2.4000e- 8.6500e- 8.6500e- 7.9700e- 7.9700e- 0.0000 21.5226 21.5226 6.7100e- 0.0000 21.6635 004 003 003 003 003 003 626 Wilshire Boulevard www.esassoc.com Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017-2934 213.599.4300 phone 213.599.4301 fax
memorandum
date November 14, 2016
to Edward Paek
from Arabesque Abdelwahed
subject LAUSD Berendo Middle School – Preliminary CEQA Review for Noise
This Memorandum presents the results of an analysis of noise impacts related to proposed upgrades to the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) Berendo Middle School (MS) located at 1157 S Berendo Street in the City of Los Angeles. LAUSD proposes to improve the school with a new gymnasium, upgraded playfields, renovated restroom, and removal of relocatable classrooms. LAUSD also proposes to construct a new retaining wall along 11th Street.
In 2014, LAUSD approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) to remove 16 bungalow buildings at the Monseñor Oscar Romero Charter School (MORCS) located on the northeast portion of the Berendo MS site. The MND prepared for MORCS found that with incorporation of mitigation measures, implementation of that project would result in less-than-significant impacts with regard to noise and vibration. Because construction of the Berendo MS project (including the retaining wall) would overlap with construction activities at the MORCS site, additional analysis was performed to determine if overlapping activities would result in significant air quality and GHG impacts.
Noise Noise is defined as unwanted sound. But not all unwanted sound rises to the level of a potentially significant environmental impact. To differentiate unwanted sound from potentially significant noise impacts, the City has established noise regulations that take into account noise-sensitive land uses. The following analysis evaluates the potential noise impacts at nearby noise-sensitive land uses resulting from construction and operation of the project. As discussed in detail immediately below, implementation of standard conditions would ensure a less than significant impact with respect to construction noise.
The typical human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies of the audible sound spectrum. As a consequence, when assessing potential noise impacts, sound is measured using an electronic filter that deemphasizes the frequencies below 1,000 Hz and above 5,000 Hz in a manner corresponding to the human ear’s decreased sensitivity to extremely low and extremely high frequencies. This method of frequency weighting is referred to as A-weighting and is expressed in units of A-weighted decibels (dBA). A-weighting follows an international standard methodology of frequency deemphasis and is typically applied to community noise measurements.
The most frequently used noise descriptors are summarized below:
Leq: The Leq, or equivalent sound level, is Leq is the energy-mean dBA during a measured time interval. It is the “equivalent” constant sound level that would have to be produced by a given source to equal the acoustic energy contained in the fluctuating sound level measured.
Lmax: The maximum, instantaneous noise level experienced during a given period of time. Applicable Noise Regulations City of Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) Section XI, Noise Regulation, establishes regulations regarding allowable increases in noise levels as a result of project implementation, both in terms of long-term operation and short-term construction activities.
The City Noise Regulation establishes acceptable ambient sound levels to regulate intrusive noises (e.g., stationary mechanical equipment and vehicles other than those traveling on public streets) within specific land use zones. In accordance with the Noise Regulation, a noise level increase of 5 dBA over the existing average ambient noise level at an adjacent property line is considered a noise violation. This standard applies to all noise sources, except vehicles traveling on public streets and construction noise.
The ambient noise level, as defined by the Noise Regulation, is the measured noise level averaged over a period
of at least 15 minutes, Leq(15-minute). The baseline ambient noise shall be the actual measured ambient noise level or the City’s presumed ambient noise level, whichever is greater. In cases in which the actual measured ambient noise level is not known, the City’s presumed ambient levels will be used as the baseline. The City’s presumed daytime (7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M.) minimum ambient noise level for properties zoned residential is 50 dBA, while the nighttime (10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M.) presumed minimum ambient noise level is 40 dBA.1 To account for people’s increased tolerance for short-duration noise events, the Noise Regulation provides a 5 dBA allowance for a noise source occurring more than five but less than fifteen minutes in any one-hour period and an additional 5 dBA allowance (total of 10 dBA) for a noise source occurring five minute or less in any one-hour period.2
Section 112.03 of the LAMC limits noise levels generated by construction equipment when construction activities are located within 500 feet of a residential zone to 75 dBA, as measured at a distance of 50 feet from the source. Compliance with this standard is only required where “technically feasible.”3 In addition, the LAMC prohibits construction between the hours of 9:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. Monday through Friday, 6:00 P.M. and 8:00 A.M. on Saturday, and at any time on Sunday or national holiday.
1 Los Angeles Municipal Code, Chapter XI, Article I, Section 111.03. 2 Los Angeles Municipal Code, Chapter XI, Article I, Section 111.02-(b). 3 In accordance with the City of Los Angeles Noise Ordinances, “technically feasible” means that the established noise limitations cannot be complied with at a project site, despite the use of mufflers, shields, sound barriers, and/or other noise reduction devices or techniques employed during the operation of equipment.
2 Therefore, the project would result in a significant noise impact if:
• Construction-related noise levels exceed 75 dBA at distance of 50 feet from equipment when construction activities are located within 500 feet of a residential property line unless technically feasible mitigation measures are incorporated;
LAUSD Standard Conditions of Approval The following noise-related standard conditions would be included as part of the Berendo MS Upgrade Project (including the new retaining wall) construction: SC-N-1 The LAUSD shall include features such as sound walls, building configuration, and other design
features in order to attenuate exterior noise levels on a school campus to less than 70 dBA L10 or
67 dBA Leq. SC-N-2 The LAUSD shall analyze the acoustical environment of the site (such as traffic) and the characteristics of planned building components (such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
[HVAC]), and design to achieve interior classroom noise levels of less than 55 dBA L10 or 45 dBA
Leq with maximum (unoccupied) reverberation times of 0.6 seconds. Noise reduction methods shall include features such as sound walls, building and/or classroom insulation, HVAC modifications, double-paned windows, and other design features in order to achieve the noise standards. SC-N-3 LAUSD shall require an acoustical analysis to identify feasible measures to reduce traffic noise increases to 3 dBA CNEL or less at the noise-sensitive land use. LAUSD shall implement recommended measures to reduce noise. SC-N-4 LAUSD shall incorporate buffer zones, sound barriers (such as buildings, masonry walls, enclosed bleacher foot wells, or other special design features) between playgrounds, stadiums, and other noise- generating facilities and adjacent residential or noise-sensitive land uses, to reduce noise levels to meet jurisdictional standards or an increase of 3 dB or less over ambient. SC-N-5 LAUSD Facilities Division or its construction contractor shall consult and coordinate with the school principal or site administrator, and other nearby noise sensitive land uses prior to construction to schedule high noise or vibration producing activities to minimize disruption. Coordination between the school, nearby land uses and the construction contractor shall continue on an as-needed basis throughout the construction phase of the project to reduce school and other noise sensitive land use disruptions. SC-N-6 The LAUSD shall require the construction contractor to minimize blasting for all construction and demolition activities, where feasible. If demolition is necessary adjacent to residential uses or fragile structures, the LAUSD shall require the construction contractor to avoid using impact tools. Alternatives that shall be considered include mechanical methods using hydraulic crushers or deconstruction techniques. SC-N-9 LAUSD shall prepare a noise assessment. If site-specific review of a school construction project identifies potentially significant adverse construction noise impacts, then LAUSD shall implement all feasible measures to reduce below applicable noise ordinances. Exterior construction noise levels exceed local noise standards, policies, or ordinances at noise sensitive receptors. LAUSD shall
3 mandate that construction bid contracts include the measures identified in the noise assessment. Specific noise reduction measures include, but are not limited to, the following: Source Controls . Time Constraints – prohibiting work during sensitive nighttime hours . Scheduling – performing noisy work during less sensitive time periods (on operating campus: delay the loudest noise generation until class instruction at the nearest classrooms has ended; residential: only between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM) . Equipment Restrictions – restricting the type of equipment used . Noise Restrictions – specifying stringent noise limits . Substitute Methods – using quieter methods and/or equipment . Exhaust Mufflers – ensuring equipment have quality mufflers installed . Lubrication & Maintenance – well maintained equipment is quieter . Reduced Power Operation – use only necessary size and power . Reduced Power Operation – use only necessary size and power . Limit Equipment Onsite – only have necessary equipment onsite . Noise Compliance Monitoring – technician on site to ensure . compliance . Quieter Backup Alarms – manually-adjustable or ambient sensitive types Path Controls . Noise Barriers – semi-permanent or portable wooden or concrete barriers . Noise Curtains – flexible intervening curtain systems hung from supports . Enclosures – encasing localized and stationary noise sources . Increased Distance – perform noisy activities farther away from receptors, including operation of portable equipment, storage and maintenance of equipment Receptor Controls . Window Treatments – reinforcing the building’s noise reduction ability . Community Participation – open dialog to involve affected residents . Noise Complaint Process – ability to log and respond to noise complaints. Advance notice of the start of construction shall be delivered to all noise sensitive receptors adjacent to the project area. The notice shall state specifically where and when construction activities will occur, and provide contact information for filing noise complaints with the contractor and the District. In the event of noise complaints the LAUSD shall monitor noise from the construction activity to ensure that construction noise does not exceed limits specified in the noise ordinance.
4 . Temporary Relocation – in extreme otherwise unmitigatable cases. Temporarily move residents or students to facilities away from the construction activity. Berendo MS Upgrade Project and New Retaining Wall Noise Analysis The project site is bordered on the north by multi-family residences on West 11th Street, on the east by multi- family residences on Berendo Street, on the west by multi-family residences on South Kenmore Avenue, and on the south by single- and multi-family residences on West 12th Street. Existing noise sensitive uses within 500 feet of the project site include the residential uses surrounding the site. In addition to offsite receptors, the analysis also took into account onsite receptors at the Berendo MS. During construction of the gymnasium, heavy equipment may be operating within 20 feet of classrooms.
Noise from construction activities would be generated by vehicles and equipment involved during various stages of construction operations: demolition, shoring, excavation, foundation, and building construction. It is anticipated that construction of a retaining wall along 11th Street would occur during the excavation stage. The noise levels created by construction equipment would vary depending on factors such as the type of equipment, the specific model, the operation being performed and the condition of the equipment. Construction noise associated with the project was analyzed using a mix of typical construction equipment, the operation of impact pile drivers for foundation preparation, and the estimated durations and construction phasing. The project construction noise model is based on construction equipment noise levels as published by the FHWA. 4
In an outdoor environment, sound levels attenuate through the air as a function of distance. Such attenuation is called “distance loss” or “geometric spreading” and is based on the source configuration, point source or line source. For a point source such as construction equipment, the rate of sound attenuation due to distance alone is 6 dB per doubling of distance from the noise source. For example, that is, a noise level of 85 dBA at a reference distance of 50 feet from the equipment would attenuate to 79 dBA at 100 feet, and 73 dBA at 200 feet. Table 1,
Estimate of Construction Noise Levels (Leq) at Offsite Sensitive Receiver Locations, provides the estimated construction noise levels for Berendo MS Upgrade Project at nearby noise sensitive receptors where current sound ambient were recorded and a comparison with the noise impact criteria.
These noise levels account for the project contractor(s) equipping construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained noise mufflers, consistent with manufacturers’ standards. The estimated noise levels represent a conservative scenario because construction activities are analyzed as if some of them were occurring along the perimeter of the construction area, whereas construction would typically occur throughout the site, further from noise-sensitive receptors. A summary of the construction noise impacts at the nearby sensitive receptors is provided in Table 1.
As shown in bold in Table 1, construction-related noise would exceed the significance threshold of 75 dBA Leq at the residential uses on 11th Street and Kenmore Avenue. Noise levels would also exceed thresholds at classrooms
located onsite. The highest construction noise level would be 88 dBA Leq during the demolition phase at the noise sensitive receptor location on 11th Street and 89 dBA at classrooms located adjacent to the new gymnasium. Noise levels usually diminish at a rate of approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Thus, a noise level of 88 dBA Leq at 60 feet to the residential uses on 11th Street would be 73 dBA Leq at 350 feet at the center of the project site. As heavy equipment passes near the boundary of the project site, the peak construction noise level at a given
4 Roadway Construction Noise Model, Federal Highway Administration, 2006.
5 moment in time could reach 88 dBA Leq; however, as the equipment travels near the center of the project site, it would be approximately 350 feet from the residential uses on 11th Street and generate a lower noise level of approximately 73 dBA Leq. With regard to onsite classroom receptors, noise levels would drop to 83 dBA at 100
feet at the center of the project site. The construction-period noise levels would likely exceed 75 dBA Leq upon the residential uses and 67 dBA Leq on the onsite classroom uses without incorporation of standard conditions.
With implementation of SC-N-9, the project would include noise reduction measures such as source controls, path controls, and receptor controls. As part of the project, noise barriers would be placed to block the line-of site between the construction equipment and the noise sensitive receptors including onsite classrooms and the existing residential uses on 11th Street and Kenmore Avenue. The noise barriers between the project construction site and the existing residential uses on 11th Street and onsite classrooms would provide a minimum of 20 dBA noise reduction. The barriers between the project construction site and the existing residential uses on Kenmore Avenue would provide a minimum of 5 dBA noise reduction. As shown in Table 1, with implementation of SC-N-9 and project features, construction noise levels would be below the significance threshold of 75 dBA. Further, the project would comply with the City of Los Angeles Noise Ordinance No. 144,331 and 161,574. Construction, activities, including delivery and haul routes, would be restricted to hours between 7:00 A.M. and 9:00 P.M. Monday through Friday and 8:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. on Saturday. No noise-generating construction activities would take place on Sundays and holidays (observed by the City). Therefore, with implementation of Standard Conditions, and adherence to the LAMC construction noise impacts would be less than significant.
6 TABLE 1 ESTIMATE OF CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS FOR BERENDO MS UPGRADE PROJECT AND RETAINING WALL CONSTRUCTION AT OFF-SITE SENSITIVE RECEIVER LOCATIONS
Estimated Nearest Construction Noise Maximum Distance Levels at the Noise Construction Noise between Sensitive Receptor Significance Level After Receptor and by Construction Impacts Exceeds Implementation of Construction Phase,a Threshold, Significance Standard a Receptor Construction Phases Site, feet Hourly Leq (dBA) (dBA, Leq) Threshold? Conditions
Residences on Demolition 220 71 75 No 71 Berendo Street Shoring 480 62 No Excavation 480 69 No Foundation 480 59 No Building Construction 480 74 No
Residences on Demolition 60 88 75 Yes 68 th 11 Street Shoring 230 67 No Excavation 230 73 No Foundation 230 67 No Building Construction 230 75 Yes
Residences on Demolition 190 78 75 Yes 73 Kenmore Shoring 190 69 No Excavation 190 75 Yes Foundation 190 69 No Building Construction 190 77 Yes
Residences on Demolition 260 65 75 No 62 th West 12 Shoring 260 56 No Excavation 260 62 No Foundation 260 56 No Building Construction 260 64 No
Berendo MS Demolition 50 89 75 Yes 69 Shoring 20 78 Yes Excavation 20 85 Yes Foundation 20 89 Yes Building Construction 20 87 Yes a Estimated construction noise levels represent a conservative condition when noise generators are at the property boundary, located closest to the receptors.
SOURCE: ESA, 2016.
Cumulative Noise Analysis Table 2, Cumulative Mitigated Construction Noise Levels shows the estimated mitigated construction noise levels at nearby noise sensitive receptors when construction of the Berendo MS Project (including the new retaining wall) and MORCS Project would occur at the same time. As shown in Table 2, combined construction noise
would not exceed the significance threshold of 75 dBA Leq at nearby noise sensitive receptors. Therefore, with implementation of standard conditions, cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
7
TABLE 2 CUMULATIVE MITIGATED CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS
Maximum Construction Noise Level Maximum (dBA Lmax) Construction Combined Noise Level Construction (Berendo MS (dBA Lmax) Noise Levels Threshold and Retaining Exceed Sensitive Receptor Wall) (MORCS) (dBA Lmax) (dBA Lmax) Threshold?
Multi-family residences at 1110 Berendo 71 57 71 75 No Multi-family residences at 2659 11th St 68 60 69 75 No Multi-family residences at 11th & Kenmore 73 59 73 75 No Multi-family residences on West 12th St 62 59 64 75 No Onsite Classrooms at Berendo MS 68 60 69 75 No
ESA 2016; Oscar Romero Charter School MND, Impact Sciences, Inc., 2014
Conclusion With implementation of standard conditions, the Berendo MS Project (including the retaining wall) would not result in new significant noise impacts. Additionally, noise generated by the concurrent construction activities for the Berendo MS Project (including the retaining wall) and MORCs Project would not result in a significant impact when combined with noise impacts related to the MORCS project. Vibration Vibration can be interpreted as energy transmitted in waves through the ground or man-made structures. These energy waves generally dissipate with distance from the vibration source. Because energy is lost during the transfer of energy from one particle to another, vibration becomes less perceptible with increasing distance from the source.
Groundborne vibration levels resulting from construction activities at the project site were estimated using data published by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in its Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (2006) document. In accordance with Noise Policy 5.5 in the City’s General Plan Community Protection Element, the potential vibration levels at offsite sensitive locations resulting from implementation of the proposed project are analyzed against the vibration thresholds established by the FTA to determine whether an exceedance of allowable vibration levels would occur. The FTA has adopted vibration standards that are used to evaluate potential building damage impacts related to construction activities, which are shown in Table 3.
8 TABLE 3 CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION DAMAGE CRITERIA
Building Category PPV (in/sec)
I. Reinforced-concrete, steel or timber (no plaster) 0.5 II. Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3 III. Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2 IV. Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12
SOURCE: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, May 2006.
In addition, the FTA has also adopted standards associated with human annoyance for groundborne vibration impacts for the following three land-use categories: Vibration Category 1 – High Sensitivity, Vibration Category 2 – Residential, and Vibration Category 3 – Institutional. The FTA defines Category 1 as buildings where vibration would interfere with operations within the building, including vibration-sensitive research and manufacturing facilities, hospitals with vibration-sensitive equipment, and university research operations. Vibration-sensitive equipment includes, but is not limited to, electron microscopes, high-resolution lithographic equipment, and normal optical microscopes. Category 2 refers to all residential land uses and any buildings where people sleep, such as hotels and hospitals. Category 3 refers to institutional land uses such as schools, churches, other institutions, and quiet offices that do not have vibration-sensitive equipment, but still have the potential for activity interference. The vibration thresholds associated with human annoyance for these three land-use categories are shown in Table 4. No thresholds have been adopted or recommended for commercial and office uses.
TABLE 4 GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION IMPACT CRITERIA FOR GENERAL ASSESSMENT
Land Use Category Frequent Eventsa Occasional Eventsb Infrequent Eventsc
Category 1: Buildings where vibration would interfere 65 VdBd 65 VdBd 65 VdBd with interior operations. Category 2: Residences and buildings where people 72 VdB 75 VdB 80 VdB normally sleep. Category 3: Institutional land uses with primarily 75 VdB 78 VdB 83 VdB daytime use.
a “Frequent Events” is defined as more than 70 vibration events of the same source per day. b “Occasional Events” is defined as between 30 and 70 vibration events of the same source per day. c “Infrequent Events” is defined as fewer than 30 vibration events of the same kind per day. d This criterion is based on levels that are acceptable for most moderately sensitive equipment such as optical microscopes.
SOURCE: FTA, 2006.
Construction activities that would occur within the project site would include grading and excavation, which would have the potential to generate low levels of groundborne vibration. As such, the existing multi-family residential uses located in the proximity of project construction could be exposed to the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels related to construction activities. The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible
9 vibrations at moderate levels, to structural damage at the highest levels. Site ground vibrations from construction activities very rarely reach the levels that can damage structures, but they may be perceived in buildings very close to a construction site.
The various PPV and RMS velocity (in VdB) levels for the general types of construction equipment that would operate during the construction of the proposed project are identified in Table 5.
TABLE 5 VIBRATION SOURCE LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Approximate PPV Approximate RMS Equipment (in/sec) at 25 feet (VdB) at 25 feet
Large Bulldozer 0.089 87 Loaded Trucks 0.076 86 Jackhammer 0.035 79 Small Bulldozer 0.003 58
SOURCE: FTA, 2006.
Construction activities associated with the proposed Berendo MS project and retaining wall would generate vibration levels which would have the potential to impact the surrounding offsite sensitive receptors to the project site if in proximity. In terms of groundborne vibration impacts associated with structural damage, this analysis uses the FTA’s vibration impact thresholds of 0.2 inches per second for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings. In terms of groundborne vibration impacts associated with human annoyance, this analysis uses the FTA’s vibration impact thresholds of 80 VdB for residences land use under conditions where there are an infrequent number of events per day.
The nearest residential buildings are located approximately 60 feet from the construction site. The residential buildings would be exposed to vibration velocities up to 0.024 inches per second PPV. The nearest classrooms are approximately 20 feet from the construction site and would be exposed to vibration velocities up to 0.09 inches per second PPV. As these values would not exceed the 0.2 inches per second PPV significance threshold (architectural damage for timber structure), vibration impacts associated with construction would be less than significant at the nearest residential building.
For human annoyance, the nearest offsite residential building is located approximately 65 feet north of the project site on West 11th Street, which would be exposed to vibration levels of up to 75 VdB. However, onsite classrooms may be exposed to vibration levels of up to 87 VdB which exceed the significance threshold of 80 VdB for human annoyance. However, SC-N-9 and project features would reduce the levels of vibration at nearby classrooms to less than 80 VdB. As such, impacts would be less than significant.
Post-construction onsite activities would be limited to school uses that would not generate excessive groundborne noise or vibration. As such, ground-borne vibration and noise levels associated with the project would be less than significant.
10 Conclusion With implementation of standard conditions, the Berendo MS Project (including the retaining wall) would not result in new significant vibration impacts. Additionally, vibration generated by the concurrent construction activities for the Berendo MS Project (including the retaining wall) and MORCs Project would not exceed the 0.2 inches per second PPV significance threshold for vibration. Impacts would be less than significant.
11 Construction Noise Calculations Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Removal of Bungalows and Demolition of Gym
Receptor: Residences on Berrendo Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Concrete/Industrial Saws 2 90 40% 220 5 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 10% 220 5 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 82 20% 220 5
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 75 Leq: 71
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Shoring
Receptor: Residences on Berrendo Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cranes 1 81 40% 220 5 Drill Rig 2 79 20% 220 5 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 25% 220 5
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 64 Leq: 62
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Excavation
Receptor: Residences on Berrendo Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Excavators 1 81 40% 220 5 Graders 1 85 40% 220 5 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 82 40% 220 5 Cranes 1 81 40% 220 5 Scrapers 1 84 40% 220 5 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 80 25% 220 5
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 67 Leq: 69
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Foundation
Receptor: Residences on Berrendo Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cement Mixer 1 79 40% 480 2 Concrete Pump 1 81 20% 480 2 Pavers 1 77 50% 480 2 Rollers 1 80 20% 480 2 Drill Rig 1 79 20% 480 2
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 59 Leq: 59
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Building Construction
Receptor: Residences on Berrendo Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cranes 1 81 40% 220 2 Forklifts 3 75 10% 220 2 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 25% 220 2 Welders 3 74 40% 220 2 Pavers 2 77 50% 220 2 Paving Equipment 2 90 20% 220 2 Rollers 2 80 20% 220 2 Cement Mixer 2 79 40% 220 2 Air Compressor 2 78 50% 220 2 Aerial Lifts 2 75 20% 220 2
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 78 Leq: 74
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Removal of Bungalows and Demolition of Gym
Receptor: Residences on 11th Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Concrete/Industrial Saws 2 90 40% 60 0 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 10% 60 0 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 82 20% 60 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 91 Leq: 88
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Shoring
Receptor: Residences on 11th Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cranes 1 81 40% 230 0 Drill Rig 2 79 20% 230 0 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 25% 230 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 69 Leq: 67
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Excavation
Receptor: Residences on Berrendo Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Excavators 1 81 40% 230 0 Graders 1 85 40% 230 0 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 82 40% 230 0 Cranes 1 81 40% 230 0 Scrapers 1 84 40% 230 0 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 80 25% 230 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 72 Leq: 73
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Foundation
Receptor: Residences on 11th Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cement Mixer 1 79 40% 230 0 Concrete Pump 1 81 20% 230 0 Pavers 1 77 50% 230 0 Rollers 1 80 20% 230 0 Drill Rig 1 79 20% 230 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 68 Leq: 67
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Building Construction
Receptor: Residences on 11th Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cranes 1 81 40% 230 0 Forklifts 3 75 10% 230 0 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 25% 230 0 Welders 3 74 40% 230 0 Pavers 2 77 50% 230 0 Paving Equipment 2 90 20% 230 0 Rollers 2 80 20% 230 0 Cement Mixer 2 79 40% 230 0 Air Compressor 2 78 50% 230 0 Aerial Lifts 2 75 20% 230 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 80 Leq: 75
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Removal of Bungalows and Demolition of Gym
Receptor: Residences on Kenmore
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Concrete/Industrial Saws 2 90 40% 190 0 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 10% 190 0 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 82 20% 190 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 81 Leq: 78
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Shoring
Receptor: Residences on Kenmore
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cranes 1 81 40% 190 0 Drill Rig 2 79 20% 190 0 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 25% 190 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 70 Leq: 69
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Excavation
Receptor: Residences on Berrendo Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Excavators 1 81 40% 190 0 Graders 1 85 40% 190 0 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 82 40% 190 0 Cranes 1 81 40% 190 0 Scrapers 1 84 40% 190 0 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 80 25% 190 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 73 Leq: 75
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Foundation
Receptor: Residences on Kenmore
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cement Mixer 1 79 40% 190 0 Concrete Pump 1 81 20% 190 0 Pavers 1 77 50% 190 0 Rollers 1 80 20% 190 0 Drill Rig 1 79 20% 190 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 69 Leq: 69
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Building Construction
Receptor: Residences on Kenmore
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cranes 1 81 40% 190 0 Forklifts 3 75 10% 190 0 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 25% 190 0 Welders 3 74 40% 190 0 Pavers 2 77 50% 190 0 Paving Equipment 2 90 20% 190 0 Rollers 2 80 20% 190 0 Cement Mixer 2 79 40% 190 0 Air Compressor 2 78 50% 190 0 Aerial Lifts 2 75 20% 190 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 81 Leq: 77
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Removal of Bungalows and Demolition of Gym
Receptor: Residences on 12th Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Concrete/Industrial Saws 2 90 40% 260 10 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 10% 260 10 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 82 20% 260 10
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 69 Leq: 65
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Shoring
Receptor: Residences on 12th Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cranes 1 81 40% 260 10 Drill Rig 2 79 20% 260 10 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 25% 260 10
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 58 Leq: 56
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Excavation
Receptor: Residences on Berrendo Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Excavators 1 81 40% 260 10 Graders 1 85 40% 260 10 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 82 40% 260 10 Cranes 1 81 40% 260 10 Scrapers 1 84 40% 260 10 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 80 25% 260 10
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 61 Leq: 62
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Foundation
Receptor: Residences on 12th Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cement Mixer 1 79 40% 260 10 Concrete Pump 1 81 20% 260 10 Pavers 1 77 50% 260 10 Rollers 1 80 20% 260 10 Drill Rig 1 79 20% 260 10
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 57 Leq: 56
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Building Construction
Receptor: Residences on 12th Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cranes 1 81 40% 260 10 Forklifts 3 75 10% 260 10 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 25% 260 10 Welders 3 74 40% 260 10 Pavers 2 77 50% 260 10 Paving Equipment 2 90 20% 260 10 Rollers 2 80 20% 260 10 Cement Mixer 2 79 40% 260 10 Air Compressor 2 78 50% 260 10 Aerial Lifts 2 75 20% 260 10
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 69 Leq: 64
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Removal of Bungalows and Demolition of Gym
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Concrete/Industrial Saws 2 90 40% 50 0 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 10% 50 0 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 82 20% 50 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 93 Leq: 89
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Shoring
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cranes 1 81 40% 20 10 Drill Rig 2 79 20% 20 10 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 80 25% 20 10
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 80 Leq: 78
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Excavation
Receptor: Residences on Berrendo Street
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Excavators 1 81 40% 20 10 Graders 1 85 40% 20 10 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 82 40% 20 10 Cranes 1 81 40% 20 10 Scrapers 1 84 40% 20 10 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 80 25% 20 10
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 83 Leq: 85
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) Project: Berendo Middle School Campus Improvements
Construction Phase: Foundation
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Reference No. of Noise Level at Acoustical Distance to Estimated Noise Equipment Description Equip. 50ft, Lmax Usage Factor Receptor, ft Shielding, dBA Cement Mixer 1 79 40% 20 0 Concrete Pump 1 81 20% 20 0 Pavers 1 77 50% 20 0 Rollers 1 80 20% 20 0 Drill Rig 1 79 20% 20 0
Receptor: Berendo School Classrooms
Construction Hour: 12 Hours during daytime (7 am to 7 pm) 0 Hours during evening (7 pm to 10 pm) 0 Hours during nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Results: Lmax: 89 Leq: 89
Source for Ref. Noise Levels: LA CEQA Guides, 2006 & FHWA RCNM, 2005
V:\AQ-ACOUSTICS\Active Projects ACOUSTICS\(ESA) LAUSD Berendo MS MND\Construction Cals\Construction - Berendo (Revised 110416) 626 Wilshire Boulevard www.esassoc.com Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213.599.4300 phone 213.599.4301 fax
October 27, 2015
Los Angeles Unified School District Office of Environmental Health and Safety Mr. Edward Paek, Contract Professional/CEQA Project Manager 333 South Beaudry Avenue, 28th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017
Subject: Cultural Resources Consulting for Berendo Middle School Facilities Improvement Project - Character-Defining Features Memorandum
Dear Mr. Paek,
ESA’s Cultural Resources Group is pleased to present the character-defining features study for the Berendo Middle School Facilities Improvement Project (project) located in Los Angeles, California. This study was completed in support of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Provided below is our understanding of the project, a description of methodology and eligibility of the campus, a brief historic context of Berendo Middle School, and identification of the contributing character-defining features that define each eligible building on the campus.
Project Understanding We understand that Los Angeles Unified School District (District) is currently planning facilities improvements to the Berendo Middle School campus that includes construction of a new gymnasium, relocation of an existing health clinic, and the conversion of existing asphalt into permeable play areas and landscaping. In order to ensure that the project is designed in a way that is sensitive to historic resources, the District requested that ESA prepare a Character-Defining Features Memorandum (CDFM) that delineates “contributing” and “non- contributing” elements on the campus and identifies character-defining features of eligible buildings. Once the design is completed, the project will also require review by a qualified preservation professional to ensure the design is in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and that the proposed project will not result in a significant adverse impact to the historic integrity of Berendo Middle School.
Methodology ESA architectural historian Sarah Champion conducted a field survey of the Berendo Middle School campus on June 19, 2015. Ms. Champion digitally photographed the exterior and interior of the 1937 historic core, which includes the Administration Building, Auditorium, Cafeteria, and Physical Education Building, as well as their immediate setting and prepared a California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 form update, which is included as Attachment 1. ESA also conducted site specific research on Berendo Middle School reviewing Sanborn fire insurance maps, historical photographs and plans, and other published sources. Additionally, ESA reviewed and applied methodology, eligibility standards, and integrity considerations presented in the LAUSD Historic Context Statement, 1870 to 1969, prepared by Sapphos Environmental, Inc. in 2014.
Mr. Paek October 27, 2015 Page 2
Eligibility The 1937 historic core of Berendo Middle School campus (Administration Building, Auditorium, Cafeteria, and Physical Education Building) was previously identified as eligible for listing in both the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) and the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) through a reconnaissance-level survey evaluation in 2002; however, the campus has not been previously formally evaluated within the context of the recently prepared LAUSD Historic Context Statement (Heumann 2002; Sapphos 2014). Previously identified character-defining features include the concrete construction, flat roofs, and recessed banks of classroom windows that reinforce the horizontal massing and detailing.
ESA formally evaluated Berendo Middle School for listing in the National Register and California Register within the context of the recently prepared LAUSD Historic Context Statement (Sapphos 2014). The school campus is recommended eligible for listing as a historic district under Criterion A/1 for the events associated with school design during the post–1933 Long Beach Earthquake period in Los Angeles and under Criterion C/3 for embodying the distinctive characteristics of the Streamline Moderne architectural style with the Administration Building, Auditorium, and Cafeteria as contributors and the Physical Education Building and all post-1945 buildings as non-contributors. The primary period of significance for Berendo Middle School is between the initial construction in 1937, after the Long Beach Earthquake, to 1945 and the onset of World War II. The Administration Building, Auditorium, and Cafeteria are also individually eligible for the National Register/California Register under Criteria A/1 and C/3 for the same reasons noted above. These three buildings are considered historical resources under CEQA. The Physical Education Building and all post-1945 buildings are not considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA (see Attachment 1 – DPR 523 Form Update for a description of the historic core of the campus and the full evaluation).
Berendo Middle School Campus History One of the oldest institutions in the District the current historic core of the Berendo Middle School campus dates from a post-1933 Long Beach Earthquake reconstruction in 1937, designed in the then popular Streamline Moderne style. The campus was opened in 1896 as the Pico Heights School until a devastating fire burned the original school building to the ground in 1898. The school was rebuilt in 1900 and became the Berendo Street Elementary School in 1903, then Berendo Intermediate School in 1911. In 1923 the school was named Berendo Middle School (Heumann, 2002). After the Long Beach Earthquake of 1933, a campus reconstruction program began in 1936. All other permanent buildings were constructed after 1945. Notable alumni of the school include author Ray Bradbury, WWII hero Jimmy Doolittle, entertainer Edgar Bergen, jazz musician J.J. Higgins, and several Olympians/athletes, actors, and future LAUSD administrators (Berendo Middle School 2015). The Auditorium is named after Rosalyn S. Heyman, a former principal of the school. Dr. Heyman later went on to become an assistant superintendent in the District (Heyman 2012).
The Streamline Moderne style of the Berendo Middle School campus exemplifies this post-Long Beach earthquake simplification of ornamental design and it characteristic of the movement to create areas of outdoor space as mentioned in the context above. In 1936, a news article in the Los Angeles Times, announced that the Administration Building, Auditorium, Cafeteria, and Physical Education buildings at Berendo Junior High School were contracted at $319,950 and awarded to builder W. W. Petley; and architects Edward Cray Taylor
Mr. Paek October 27, 2015 Page 3 and Ellis Wing Taylor (LAT 1936). The Taylor brothers, Edward and Ellis, were employed as architect and designers by Donald Douglas of Santa Monica on the original buildings of the Douglas Aircraft Factory. The Taylor brothers also planned later additions to the plant, now one of the largest and most important the country. Additionally, Taylor brothers were the architect and engineer behind the Wolfer Printing Company Building in Orange County. Born in Chicago, the brothers would also build Yuma’s Masonic Temple, listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Edward also designed the Glassell Park Elementary School. Edward died in his Beverly Hills home in 1946 at the age of 49. Ellis died in 1951 in his Arcadia home (Bariscale 2008; LAT 1951; Whithey 1956). The Taylor brothers are listed on the Master List of Architects for the City of Beverly Hills (City of Beverly Hills 2015).
Character-Defining Features The following section provides a description of the character-defining features of the three buildings (Administration Building, Auditorium, and Cafeteria) that contribute to Berendo Middle School’s eligibility for the National Register and California Register, as well as those that would be considered non-character defining features. The term "character-defining features" refer to all those distinctive elements and physical features that comprise the appearance of a historic building. Character-defining aspects of a historic building include its massing, materials, features, craftsmanship, decorative details, interior spaces and features, as well its site and environment (Nelson 1988). A building's character can be irreversibly damaged or changed in many ways, for example, by inappropriate repointing of the brickwork, by removal of a distinctive side porch, by changes to the window sash, by changes to the setting around the building, by changes to the major room arrangements, by the introduction of an atrium, or by painting previously unpainted woodwork, etc. Character-defining features of a building should be preserved because their loss or alteration would diminish or destroy aspects of the historic character (Nelson 1988). . Built in the 1930s, the historic core of the campus was constructed in the Streamline Moderne style. The Streamline Moderne became a popular style during the Great Depression and World War II period. Its clean lines and minimalist ornament both celebrated the modern machineage and signaled the period of austerity triggered by the Great Depression. Compared with its more ornamental predecessor, the Art Deco style, Streamline Moderne is more restrained in its ornamental program and emphasizes the horizontal rather than the vertical. Character- defining features of this style can include horizontal bands of windows, decorative raised or grooved horizontal lines, flat canopies with banded fascia, and narrow coping at the roofline. Other characteristics include smooth wall surfaces, usually clad in stucco, glass block or porthole windows, and rounded corners. Reference to aerodynamic design is a signature of the style (Sapphos 2014). Since the Berendo Middle School was built in the Streamline Moderne Style it is important to note these stylistic character-defining features where visible. The historic buildings in the southeastern corner of the campus feature a predominant horizontal emphasis, massing, and accents, such as moldings and continuous sill courses; smooth stucco or concrete exterior finish; curvilinear/rounded wall surfaces, corners, and features; recessed windows with no surrounds; and flat roofs.
Mr. Paek October 27, 2015 Page 4
The character-defining buildings and landscapes on the Berendo Middle School campus were analyzed and classified as significant (primary), contributing (secondary), and non‐contributing. Significant (primary) character-defining buildings and landscapes date to the period of significance, are visually prominent, and retain high integrity. Contributing (secondary) character-defining buildings and landscapes are not as visually prominent, retain moderate integrity, or may fall outside the period of significance. The following provides a description of the significant (primary) and contributing (secondary) character-defining buildings and landscapes of Berendo Middle School dating from the period of significance (1937-1945) and a list of features that contribute to the visual character and architectural significance of the campus. Non-contributing alterations located on identified significant or contributing resources are italicized. If a building, landscape, or feature is not listed below as significant or contributing, it can be assumed the building, landscape, or feature is non- contributing. Figure 1 in Attachment 2 illustrates significant, contributing, and non-contributing buildings and landscapes of Berendo Middle School.
Significant (Primary): Site Plan and Landscape • Indoor-outdoor covered connecting walkways between Administration Building and Cafeteria and Auditorium • Administration Building façade set-back behind prominent hardscaping elements on the southeastern corner of the campus facing the intersection of West 12th Street and South Berendo Street, as well as landscaped areas in front of the Administration building on the south and east elevations • Courtyard between Administration Building and the Cafeteria, which includes landscape, hardscape, and surrounding concrete pathways • Covered walkways connecting the Cafeteria, Administration Building, and the Auditorium and the open space and landscaped areas between these three buildings • Setbacks from West 12th Street in front of the Auditorium, as well as the geometric hardscaped planters located in front of the primary façade of the Auditorium
Significant (Primary): Administration Building • Concrete construction with smooth wall surface • Rectangular massing with an L-Shaped form which anchors the two other contributing buildings on the southeast corner of the campus • Two-story angled bay primary (southeast) façade which projects outward from two-story primary elevation displaying sculptural relief panels • Flat roof • Horizontal bandings: o Specifically the projecting lintel course, currently painted in blue, which wraps the entirety of the building, and the thin double string lintel course just below the lintel course which also wraps the entirety of the building, as well as the additional string courses and base course that also runs along the water table at the base of the building • Large horizontal multilight windows (Alteration, some windows have been altered or removed due to mechanical HVAC vents and ducts)
Mr. Paek October 27, 2015 Page 5
• Recessed banks of classroom windows, with flat concrete awnings with curved ends, that reinforce the horizontal massing and detailing • Exterior alterations include the addition of ramp on the west end, added metal electrical piping and security lighting and security grates, and plastic Berendo signage on southeast façade, alteration to metal double-doors displaying rectangular transoms behind metal security grates • Interior: Circulation plan, central large two-directional half-landing concrete staircase, wooden flooring in the classrooms, Coffer ceiling with skylights in library, wooden flooring in the classrooms • Interior alterations include renovated and replaced interior spaces, or those in disrepair - such as interior tiling, ceiling panels, lighting fixtures, and doors.
Contributing (Secondary): Auditorium • Concrete construction with smooth wall surface • Flat roof with stepped parapet with string cornice detailing along this primary elevation • Horizontal lines emphasized by string courses, horizontal bandings, and sill courses o Four thin courses of horizontal band detailing at the east and west wall junctions • Metal lettering on Auditorium façade • Flat, curved awning featuring four decorative modillions • Curved walls and lighting of the foyer and auditorium of the Auditorium • Rectangular massing and plan • Foyer Interior o Double panel wood doors into auditorium o Decorative openings and curved walls o Curved vestibule with decorative ticket booth window • Auditorium Interior o Wood paneled proscenium o Curved Ceiling beam in front of stage o Auditorium seats with wood armrests, backrest and bottom o Pendant lights o Ceiling beam in front of stage o Crown moldings o Fluted pilasters and fluted and curved chair railing o Long rectangular centered moderne ceiling light • Interior alterations include renovated and replaced interior spaces, or those in disrepair - such as interior tiling, ceiling panels, lighting fixtures, and doors. • Landscape in-front of primary elevation: concrete stairs/hardscape and geometric planters • Exterior alterations include the addition of Large HVAC and storage units on sides and rear of building, as well as added Metal electrical piping and security lighting, majority of the window glass replaced/filled in and metal security screens installed over windows
Mr. Paek October 27, 2015 Page 6
Contributing (Secondary): Cafeteria • Concrete construction with smooth wall surface • Flat roof and square form with curved corner • Horizontal lines o Specifically the large band course, a sill course, a decorative cornice, and a foundation with a sill course ledgement all wrapping around the exterior of the building • Large horizontal multilight windows • Curved corners at the southeast wall junction • Interior alterations include renovated and replaced interior spaces, or those in disrepair - such as interior tiling, ceiling panels, lighting fixtures, and doors. • Exterior alterations include the 1969 addition of the covered wooden lunch shelter, metal roll-up windows that lead to the cafeteria kitchens, metal railings and doors
Recommendations To ensure that the project conforms to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and would not result in a significant impact to historical resources under CEQA, an ESA architectural historian will review the final design plans and compose a memorandum summarizing the findings and provide recommendations, if any, to reduce impacts to historical resources to less than significant. Alterations to significant (primary) buildings and landscapes (i.e., Administration Building and identified site plan/landscape features) should be avoided or minimized since they could result in the loss of the campus’s ability to convey its historical significance. Alterations to contributing (secondary) buildings and landscapes (i.e., Auditorium and Cafeteria) are afforded more flexibility since they are less likely to adversely impact the significance of the campus; although they should be preserved and rehabilitated to the greatest extent feasible. Alteration or removal of non-contributing buildings and landscapes (i.e., Physical Education Building, post-1945 buildings, and remaining un-identified site plan/landscape features) are afforded the most flexibility since these buildings and landscapes do not contribute to the historical significance of the school and their alteration or removal would not adversely impacts the historical significance of the campus.
In addition, in the final design it is important to note that new additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction must not destroy historic materials that characterize the campus. The new work should be differentiated from the old and should be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the campus and its environment. New additions and adjacent or related new construction should be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic campus and its environment would be unimpaired.
Mr. Paek October 27, 2015 Page 7
Please let me know if you have any questions. You can reach me at (619)719-4197 or [email protected].
Sincerely,
Sarah Champion ESA Architectural Historian cc: Candace Ehringer, ESA Cultural Resources Project Manager (831) 737-7438
Attachments: 1) DPR 523 Form Update 2) Figure 1 – Berendo Middle School Contributors
References Cited Baker, Lindsay, “A History of School Design and Its Indoor Environmental Standards, 1900 to Today,” PhD Dissertation. Berkeley: Department of Architecture, Center for the Built Environment, University of California, Berkeley, January 2012.
Bariscale, Floyd B., “Big Orange Landmarks: Exploring the Landmarks of Los Angeles, One Monument at a Time, No. 161 - Wolfer Printing Company Building” posted Saturday, July 12, 2008. Accessed at http://bigorangelandmarks.blogspot.com/2008/07/no-161-wolfer-printing-company-building.html on August 16, 2015, 2008.
Berendo Middle School, History of Berendo. Accessed at http://www.berendoms.us/history-of-berendo/ on August 16, 2015.
City of Beverly Hills, List of Local Master Architects, online resource . Accessed at https://www.beverlyhills.org/.../ListofMasterArchitects.pdf on August 16, 2015.
Eales, John R., “A Brief, General History of the Los Angeles City School System,” Doctoral Dissertation (Los Angeles: University of California, June 1956), 78.
Heumann, Leslie J. SAIC, Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms, Berendo Middle School, March 2002.
Mr. Paek October 27, 2015 Page 8
Heyman, Rosalyn S., “Lessons I Learned Along the Way,” Colleague Vol. 29, No. 2, Fall-Winter 2012.
Los Angeles City Board of Education, The Reconstruction Program of the Los Angeles City Schools, 1933 – 1935 (inclusive) (Los Angeles, CA: 1933), 5.
Los Angeles Times (LAT) 1934 “Safety, Simplicity and Old-California Beauty Combined in Mission-Type Schools of Reconstruction Program,” Los Angeles Times, 9 January 1934.
Los Angeles Times (LAT) 1936 “School Structural Program Advanced $2,781,523: Seven Contracts at$1,352,523 Awarded; Bids on $1,429,000 Structures Asked,” Los Angeles Times, 27 September 1936.
Los Angeles Times (LAT) 1951 “E. W. Taylor, Designer of Plane Factories, Dies: Douglas and Consolidated Plants Built by Architect and Structural Engineer,” Los Angeles Times, 21 January 1951.
Nelson, Lee H. Preservation Briefs 17 “Architectural Character—Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving their Character Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving their Character.” National Park Service, 1988. Accessed online at http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to- preserve/preservedocs/preservation-briefs/17Preserve-Brief-VisualAspects.pdf on August 17, 2015.
Sapphos Environmental, Inc., City of Long Beach Historic Context Statement, prepared for the City of Long Beach Department of Development Services (Long Beach, CA, 2009).
Sapphos Environmental, Inc., Los Angeles Unified School District Historic Context Statement, 1870 to 1969, prepared for the Los Angeles Unified School District Office of Environmental Health and Safety. Los Angeles, CA, March 2014.
Withey, Henry F., Biographical Dictionary of American Architects (Deceased). Page 290. Accessed at http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015007571188 on August 16, 2015, 1956.
ATTACHMENT 1: Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 Form Update
State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 35 *Resource Name or #: Berendo Middle School
P1. Other Identifier: Pico Heights School, Berendo Street School, Berendo Intermediate School *P2. Location: Not for Publication Unrestricted *a. County: Los Angeles and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Date: T ; R ; of of Sec ; S.B. B.M. c. Address: 1157 South Berendo Street City: Los Angeles Zip: 90006 d. UTM: Zone: mE/ mN e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) Elevation: 291 feet amsl
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
Berendo Middle School is located at 1157 South Berendo Street, Los Angeles, CA 90006. Four buildings on the campus were constructed in 1937 (Adminstration Building, Auditorium, Cafeteria, and Physical Education Building). Berendo Middle School was previously recommended eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) though survey evaluation; however, the school was not formally evaluated for listing. Three of the four buildings (Administration Building, Auditorium, and Cafeteria) are recommended eligible for listing in the NRHP/CRHR under Criteria A/1 and C/3. The Physical Education Building is recommended not eligible due to a lack of integrity. The school campus is recommended eligible for listing as a historic district with the Administration Building, Auditorium, and Cafeteria as contributors and the Physical Education Building and all post-1945 buildings as a non-contributors.
*P3b. Resource Attributes: HP15. Educational Buildings *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: P5a. Photo or Drawing Berendo Middle School, Administration Building
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: 1937 Historic Prehistoric Both
*P7. Owner and Address: LAUSD 333 S Beaudry Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90017
*P8. Recorded by: Sarah Champion | ESA 626 Wilshire Blvd, Ste 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017
*P9. Date Recorded: August 2015
*P10. Survey Type: intensive
*P11. Report Citation: Champion, Sarah, 2015. Cultural Resources Consulting for Berendo Middle School Facilities Improvement Project - Character-Defining Features Memorandum. Prepared for LAUSD. Prepared by ESA. August 2015.
*Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (List):
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
DISTRICT RECORD Trinomial
Page 2 of 35 * NRHP Status Code 3B * Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) Berendo Middle School D1. Historic Name: D2. Common Name:______
* D3. Detailed Description (Discuss overall coherence of the district, its setting, visual characteristics, and minor features. List all elements of district.):
Berendo Middle School appears eligible as a historic district w ith the Administration Building, Auditorium, and Cafeteria identified as contributors.
* D4. Boundary Description (Describe limits of district and attach map show ing boundary and district elements.): See Location and Sketch maps
* D5. Boundary Justification: Campus boundary
D6. Significance: Theme Education Area Los Angeles Period of Significance 1937- 1945 Applicable Criteria A/1 and C/3 (Discuss district's importance in terms of its historical context as defined by theme, period of significance, and geographic scope. Also address the integrity of the district as a w hole.)
Berendo Middle School appears eligible as a historic district w ith the Administration Building, Auditorium, and Cafeteria identified as contributors. The campus is eligible as a historic district under Criterion A/1 (association w ith events) and Criterion C/3 (architectural distinction). Per the LAUSD Historic Context, for a post-1933 Long Beach earthquake school to be eligible under it must exemplify 1) a unified site plan consisting of buildings and structures designed and sited according to their use; 2) use of designed outdoor and landscaped spaces, for outdoor study, recreation and dining; 3) often displays connecting sheltered corridors throughout campus; 4) an emphasis on a more expansive site plan; 5) a varied collection of buildings, differentiated by function and use (rather than a single building w ith all functions inside); 6) possibly includes an elaborate administration building, located near the campus entrance (administration buildings usually serve as the focal point of the campus); 7) groupings of classroom w ings, auditoriums, gymnasiums, cafeterias, and outdoor recreation and dining areas; and 8) middle or senior high schools might include a gymnasium designed in the style of the campus overall.
The Administration Building, Auditorium, and Cafeteria all date to the mid-1930s period directly follow ing the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake, and all reflect the Streamline Moderne style common of 1930s Los Angeles schools. The campus appears to have a unified site plan of buildings designed around the central courtyard and sited according to their differing uses. The campus w as designed w ith easy access to outdoors accommodating sheltered courtyard and patio spaces. The sheltered corridors linking campus buildings and patio spaces betw een the Administration Building, Cafeteria, and Auditorium reflect the campus design styles of that time period. Campuses at this time, much like Berendo Middle School, w ere increasingly differentiated, w ith administration buildings, auditoriums and gymnasiums, separate classroom, shop, and specialty w ings, and cafeterias. The Administration Building, Auditorium, and Cafeteria, w hich are clustered in the same area and connected via outdoor spaces and corridors, are considered contributors. The Physical Education Building, w hile dating to the same time period as the other three buildings, is physically separated from the remainder of the historic campus and is not connected via sheltered corridors to the rest of the campus, nor is it in the Streamline Moderne style. The Physical Education Building, along w ith all buildings that post- date the period of significance (i.e., constructed after 1945), are considered non-contributors.
* D7. References (Give full citations including the names and addresses of any informants, w here possible.): See continuation sheet
* D8. Evaluator: Sarah Champion Date: August 2015
Affiliation and Address: ESA, 626 Wilshire Blvd., Ste 1100, Los Angeles, CA 90017
DPR 523D (9/2013)
State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD * Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) Berendo Middle School * NRHP Status Code 3B Page 3 of 35
B1. Historic Name: Pico Heights School (1896), Berendo Street School (1903), Berendo Intermediate School (1911) B2. Common Name: Berendo Middle School (1923) B3. Original Use: School campus B4. Present Use: School campus * B5 . Architectural Style: Streamline Moderne
* B6 . Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) The Administration Building, Auditorium, Cafeteria, and Physical Education Building were constructed in 1937. All other permanent buildings were constructed after 1945.
* B7 . Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
* B8 . Related Features: Administration Building, Auditorium, and Cafeteria.
B9a. Architect: Edward Cray Taylor and Ellis Wing Taylor b. Builder: W.W. Petley
* B1 0 . Significance: Theme Post–1933 Long Beach Earthquake Schools Area Los Angeles Unified School District Period of Significance 1937-1945 Property Type school campus Applicable Criteria A/1, C/3 (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
(See continuation sheet)
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes)
* B1 2 . References: (See continuation sheet)
B13. Remarks: * B1 4 . Evaluator: Sarah Champion * Date of Evaluation: August 16, 2015
See attached sketch map
(This space reserved for official comment s.)
DPR 523B (9/2013) * Required information State of California- The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
Page 4 of 35 * Resource Name or Number: Berendo Middle School
*Map name: Hollywood *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of Map: 1972, Photorevised 1978
Project Location
0 2,000
Feet 0 600
Meters
DPR 523J (1/95) State of California- The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
SKETCH MAP Trinomial: Page 5 of 35 * Resource Name or Number: Berendo Middle School
t
S
a
n
i
l
a
t
a
C
S
W 11th St
Physical Education Building
e
t
v
S
A
o
e
r d
n o
e
m
r
n
e
e
B
K
S
S
Cafeteria
Auditorium
Administration Building
W 12th St
Campus Boundary
t Campus Features
S
a
n
i
l
a
t
a
C 0 120
S
Feet 0 40
Meters
*Date: 8/18/2015 *Drawn By: J. Nielsen * Required Information DPR 523J (1/95) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 6 of 35
* Recorded by: Sarah Champion * Date August 2015 X Continuation Update
* B10. Significance (Continued).
Historic Context The March 1933 Long Beach earthquake was one of the decade’s most significant events for the region’s built environment. The 6.5-magnitude earthquake caused significant damage and losses; in Long Beach, more than two-thirds of the city’s schools were in need of demolition and reconstruction (Sapphos 2009). In Los Angeles, 40 unreinforced masonry school buildings were destroyed (LACBOE 1933). In addition, after a survey of Los Angeles schools within 10 days of the earthquake, all damaged or “precariously placed” chimneys, parapets, fire walls, and ornamentation were removed. Fortunately, the earthquake took place on a Saturday when school was not in session. The Long Beach earthquake posed a disaster for the district but also an opportunity for the region’s architects. While change and reform in school plant design were already underway, the Long Beach earthquake and the mini–school construction boom it triggered provided ample opportunities to test new ideas about school architecture and campus planning in Southern California (Sapphos 2014).
Following the 1933 Long Beach earthquake, state and city legislation regarding school building codes and practices shifted the character of Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) schools and campuses. Requirements of the Field Act (1934), such as maintaining one-story massing for elementary schools and no more than two stories for junior and high schools, mirrored reforms already under way. Classroom wings continued to be designed for connections to the outdoors, with L-, H-, U-, and T-shaped buildings accommodating sheltered courtyard and patio spaces. Continuing another trend under way in the 1920s, campuses displayed an increasingly unified site design, with sheltered corridors linking campus buildings. The advances of the Progressive Education Movement also continued to shift school plant design. Campuses were increasingly differentiated, with administration buildings, auditoriums and gymnasiums, separate classroom, shop, and specialty wings, and cafeterias. Adequate indirect lighting and ventilation were provided through the use of generous bands of windows, including multilight sashes, casements, and clerestories. Stylistically, these buildings were less ornamental than their 1920s period-revival counterparts. Styles included Streamline Moderne, Art Deco, and Late Moderne. Much post-earthquake reconstruction was funded through the Public Works Administration (PWA), and many schools exhibit a range of PWA Moderne styles (Sapphos 2014).
Continuing the trend begun in the 1920s, integration of classrooms with the outdoors became one key factor for school improvement. The early-twentieth-century recognition of the importance of children’s playgrounds and an increasing emphasis on the benefits of outdoor living fueled this movement (Sapphos 2014). Numerous proposals were forwarded for including more indoor-outdoor connections for classrooms and campuses, whether through the use of patios, courtyards, or playing fields. So central was the concern for outdoor classrooms and recreation that, by the 1930s, the trend became known as the “open-air school” movement, with its emphasis on “air, light, outdoor learning, and easy circulation through the school buildings.” (Sapphos 2014; Baker 2012).
By the mid-1930s, the advent of the New Deal and the PWA (later the Works Progress Administration) sponsored a generation of new building. Throughout the United States, PWA funding helped buoy school construction during the Great Depression, with approximately 70 percent of all new school construction in the 1930s funded through the agency (Baker 2012). In Southern California, following the 1933 Long Beach earthquake and the urgent need for new facilities, PWA funding for school construction and reconstruction totaled over $13 million, a sum accounting for 62 percent of the spending overall (Sapphos 2014; Eales 1956). Throughout the United States, PWA buildings, including dozens of schools, became known for their distinctive Streamline Moderne styling. In Southern California, Streamline Moderne ideas were also applied to historic-eclectic styles that had been popular in the 1920s, creating new stylistic hybrids (Sapphos 2014).
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 7 of 35 As reconstruction began, Los Angeles City school districts intended to build new seismically sound buildings but also facilities with regionally inflected styles. As the Los Angeles Times reported in 1934, new and repaired buildings would be designed for “absolute safety with simplicity and beauty of architecture in harmony with the atmosphere and traditions of Southern California” (LAT 1934). Many designs were executed by the district’s architectural department, under the direction of Alfred Nibecker, but bids were also issued to outside architects, with the intention of awarding the work to a wide field of architects. In addition, new buildings were to be explicitly Southern Californian in design but “free of needless ornamentation” (LAT 1934). This represented a move away from 1920s period-revival styles but also a nod to earthquake safety, since applied ornament often failed and fell to the ground during earthquakes.
Berendo Middle School One of the oldest institutions in the District the current historic core of the Berendo Middle School campus dates from a post-1933 Long Beach Earthquake reconstruction in 1937, designed in the then popular Streamline Moderne style. The campus was opened in 1896 as the Pico Heights School until a devastating fire burned the original school building to the ground in 1898. The school was rebuilt in 1900 and became the Berendo Street Elementary School in 1903, then Berendo Intermediate School in 1911. In 1923 the school was named Berendo Middle School (Heumann 2002). After the Long Beach Earthquake of 1933, a campus reconstruction program began in 1936. All other permanent buildings were constructed after 1945. Notable alumni of the school include author Ray Bradbury, WWII hero Jimmy Doolittle, entertainer Edgar Bergen, jazz musician J.J. Higgins, and several Olympians/athletes, actors, and future LAUSD administrators (Berendo Middle School 2015). The Auditorium is named after Rosalyn S. Heyman, a former principal of the school. Dr. Heyman later went on to become an assistant superintendent in the District (Heyman 2012).
The Streamline Moderne style of the Berendo Middle School campus exemplifies this post-Long Beach earthquake simplification of ornamental design and it characteristic of the movement to create areas of outdoor space as mentioned in the context above. In 1936, a news article in the Los Angeles Times, announced that the Administration Building, Auditorium, Cafeteria, and Physical Education buildings at Berendo Junior High School were contracted at $319,950 and awarded to builder W. W. Petley; and architects Edward Cray Taylor and Ellis Wing Taylor (LAT 1936). The Taylor brothers, Edward and Ellis, were employed as architect and designers by Donald Douglas of Santa Monica on the original buildings of the Douglas Aircraft Factory. The Taylor brothers also planned later additions to the plant, now one of the largest and most important the country. Additionally, Taylor brothers were the architect and engineer behind the Wolfer Printing Company Building in Orange County. Born in Chicago, the brothers would also build Yuma’s Masonic Temple, listed in the NRHP. Edward also designed the Glassell Park Elementary School. Edward died in his Beverly Hills home in 1946 at the age of 49. Ellis died in 1951 in his Arcadia home (Bariscale 2008; LAT 1951; Whithey 1956). The Taylor brothers are listed on the List of Master Architects for the City of Beverly Hills (City of Beverly Hills 2015).
Administration Building Year Built: 1937 Architectural Style: Streamline Moderne
The Administration Building, also known as “Crusader Hall” was built in 1937 and is an L-shaped plan building constructed on a raised concrete foundation. The building is located in the southeast corner of the campus, and anchors the historic core at the intersection of South Berendo Street and West 12th Street. The building is of concrete construction and is designed in the then popular Streamline Moderne style. The long L-shaped building is two-stories in height and has a flat roof. The façade faces southeast and is angled across the southeast corner of the intersection, and has a recessed entry comprised of two sets of flush metal double-doors displaying rectangular transoms behind metal security grates. To each side of the metal doors are two single fixed vertical windows with thick wooden muntins set in an eight light pattern, with emphasis added on the horizontal muntins and set behind metal security grates. Beneath each of these
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 8 of 35 windows are louvered ventilators, sealed with paint.
Each side of the entrance has a canted bay projection on the first story displaying the sculptural enhancement relief panels, depicting a woman and a man, respectively, escorting young students in towards the building. In front of this entrance are two-levels of concrete steps (five step and six step sets), anchored by built in concrete planters and metal hand rails. The second story of this southeastern facing façade displays a dominating large rectangular multipane metal window comprised of seven columns and four rows of rectangular sashes with awning operation along the middle two rows. There is a single vertical window bay to each side of this large window bay, featuring a single column of the same rectangular sashes with awning operation and a louvered ventilator in the lowest sash. This second story window arrangement has a projecting sill course that encompasses the three window bays. Additionally there is a projecting lintel course, painted in blue, which wraps the entirety of the building. Just below this lintel course is a thin double string course which also wraps the entirety of the building. The original metal lettering stating “Berendo Middle School” has been replaced with a plastic light rectangular sign stating “Beautiful Berendo Middle School.”
The south elevation of the Administration Building is comprised of three window bays of large horizontal emphasis, and two smaller window bays displaying a pair of rectangular two-over-two vertically oriented single-hung windows with horizontal muntins. The three larger bays have a band of five rectangular two- over-two vertically oriented single-hung windows with horizontal muntins on both the first and second stories. The first story windows are protected by metal security grates, and louvered ventilators are fixed into the lower sash of several of the windows. The three westernmost window bays feature a flat concrete awning with curved ends. Along the first story, this elevation has the same projecting sill course and thin double string course, as previously described running along on the second story and entirety of the building. The two floors are divided by a set of two additional string courses, and there is an additional base course that also runs along the water table at the base of the building, both of which wrap the entirety of the building.
The west elevation of the Administration Building provides a covered walkway connection to the Auditorium, and additional entrance into the building. There are non-historic ramps with metal handrails leading up to this entrance from both north and south directions. The entry on this elevation is comprised of flush metal double-doors with a rectangular transom featuring four columns of three horizontal lights. Above the covered walkway is a pair of rectangular two-over-two vertically oriented single-hung windows with horizontal muntins protected by a metal screen.
The north and west central facing elevations of the L-shaped Administration Building feature two covered walkways connecting the building to the Cafeteria, one running west-east and one running north-south. These covered walkways, combined with the L-shape of the Administration Building, form an open outdoor square shaped eating area between the two buildings with fixed outdoor dining tables. These courtyard facing elevations feature a similar arrangement of window bays and design as the other elevations, as well as the string courses, sill courses, and base course as seen along the entirety of the building’s exterior. The southeastern corner of the building has an entry of flush metal double-doors, with a two story rectangular multipane (35 light) window above the entrance.
The north elevation of the L-shaped building Administration Building has a large indoor/outdoor exterior staircase placed on an angle to the elevations alignment. This staircase has a large rectangular form and is constructed of concrete metal security grates and hand railing. There are two square one-over-one single hung windows, one on each story, located just east of the staircase. The same string courses, sill courses, and base course are seen along this elevation. The east elevation of the Administration Building, along South Berendo Street displays the same arrangement of bays and windows as seen on the south elevation. The north end of this elevation has a basement level entry, of two flush metal double-doors with a curved concrete awning. The historic integrity of the exterior of the building is good, with most original materials appearing to be intact.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 9 of 35 The interior of the Administration building features hallways with lockers, a central staircase, classrooms, administrative offices, restrooms, and a library on the second floor. The flooring is primarily of large square laminate tiling in the hallways, wooden flooring in the classrooms (although some feature laminate tiling), small ceramic tiling in the restrooms, and carpeting in the library. The walls are made of plaster and feature metal lockers in the hallways and wooden built-in cabinetry and bookshelves in the classrooms and library. The ceilings feature acoustical paneling and fluorescent lighting, with the library featuring a large coffered ceiling with square skylights and exposed beams. The majority of the doors are large metal flush doors with thin rectangular vision lights, although some doors are flush only and feature no sash or glazing. The center of the building features a large two-directional half-landing concrete staircase with metal hand railing. Overall, the historic integrity of the interior of the building is fair, with most original materials appearing to be intact with some modern replacements and repairs.
Evaluation:
Criterion A/1. The resource is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. Per the LAUSD Historic Context, for a post-1933 Long Beach earthquake school to be eligible under Criterion A/1 it must exemplify: 1) the post-Long Beach earthquake school planning and design concepts of the period, including the 1934 Field Act; 2) be a one-story elementary school or two-story middle or high school, and 3) retain most of the associative and character-defining features of the period. The LAUSD context notes these character-defining features for the period as two-story massing, reinforced concrete and steel frame construction, classroom wings designed for easy access to outdoors with L-, H-, T-shaped building plans, generous expanses of windows, stylistically more streamline and less ornamental than earlier architectural styles.
The Administration Building appears to reflect the majority of these characteristics, such as L-shaped construction, two-story massing, smooth concrete construction, generous expanses of windows, and Streamline Modern styling. As such, it exemplifies the response to the reconstruction of public schools following the Long Beach Earthquake in 1933, as well as the expansion of existing schools in anticipation of rapid residential growth in the vicinity. As a strong representative of the period of reconstruction following the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and reflecting its key elements of design and style, the Berendo Middle School Administrative Building is recommended eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion A/1 for its association with the post-1933 Long Beach earthquake construction.
Criterion B/2. The resource is associated with the lives of significant persons in our past; or associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history. Research did not reveal a noteworthy association with persons significant in our past. Criterion B/2 applies to properties associated with individuals whose specific contributions to history can be identified and documented. Persons “significant in our past” refers to individuals whose activities are demonstrably important within a local, state, or national historical context. The criterion is generally restricted to those properties that illustrate (rather than commemorate) a person's important achievements and productive life, and must be the property that is most closely associated with that person. Each property associated with an important individual should be compared to other associated properties to identify those that best represent the person's historic contributions (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002). While the school did produce several notable alumni, such as author Ray Bradbury, WWII hero Jimmy Doolittle, entertainer Edgar Bergen, jazz musician J.J. Higgins, and several Olympians/athletes, actors, and future LAUSD administrators, none of these person’s derives their notoriety from their association with Berendo Middle School. (Individuals involved in the design or construction of the building are discussed under Criterion C/3.) Therefore, the Berendo Middle School Administrative Building is recommended not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion B/2.
Criterion C/3. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 10 of 35 distinction. Criterion C/3 applies to properties significant for their physical design or construction, including such elements as architecture, landscape architecture, engineering, and artwork. To be eligible under Criterion C/3, a property must meet at least one of the following requirements: embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; possess high artistic value; or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The first requirement, that properties “embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction,” refers to the way in which a property was conceived, designed, or fabricated by a people or culture in past periods of history. “The work of a master” refers to the technical or aesthetic achievements of an architect or craftsman. “High artistic values” concerns the expression of aesthetic ideals or preferences and applies to aesthetic achievement. A structure is eligible as a specimen of its type or period of construction if it is an important example (within its context) of building practices of a particular time in history (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002).
The Administration Building does appear to embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction. The building reflects the Streamline Moderne architectural style:
The Streamline Moderne became a popular style during the Great Depression and World War II period. Its clean lines and minimalist ornament both celebrated the modern machineage and signaled the period of austerity triggered by the Great Depression. Compared with its more ornamental predecessor, the Art Deco style, Streamline Moderne is more restrained in its ornamental program and emphasizes the horizontal rather than the vertical. This is achieved through incorporating bands of windows, decorative raised or grooved horizontal lines, flat canopies with banded fascia, and narrow coping at the roofline. Other characteristics include smooth wall surfaces, usually clad in stucco, glass block or porthole windows, and rounded corners. Reference to aerodynamic design is a signature of the style (Sapphos, 2014).
The Administration Building reflects the architectural detailing of the Streamline Moderne style, including flat roof, concrete construction with smooth wall surface, horizontal massing emphasized by string courses, horizontal bandings, and sill courses, recessed banks of classroom windows with flat concrete awnings with curved ends that reinforce the horizontal massing, and large horizontal multilight windows.
Architects Edward Cray Taylor and Ellis Wing Taylor designed the Administrative Building. The Taylor brothers are considered master craftsmen and architects for their extensive and significant work in Southern California, and are listed as Master Architects for the City of Beverly Hills. While the two men gained prominence from their work on Douglas Aircraft’s Santa Monica facilities, Wolfer Printing Company Office in Orange County, and the Masonic Temple in Yuma, AZ (listed in the NRHP), the Taylor brothers did not gain prominence from their association with Berendo Middle School. In order to meet Criterion C/3 for association with a master craftsman, the building must reflect the significance of the individual’s body of work. The Administrative Building at Berendo Middle School does not significantly represent the Taylor brothers’ body of work.
The Berendo Middle School Administrative Building is recommended eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion C/3 for its architectural distinction.
Criterion D/4. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory of the local area, California or the nation. Criterion D/4 asks whether a property has the potential to yield information important to prehistory or history. While most often applied to archaeological districts and sites, Criterion D/4 can also apply to buildings, structures, and objects that contain important information. In order for these types of properties to be eligible under Criterion D/4, they themselves must be, or must have been, the principal source of the important information (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002). The Administrative Building does not appear to yield significant information that would expand our current knowledge or theories of design, methods of construction, operation, or other information that is not already known. Therefore, the Administrative Building is recommended not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion D/4.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 11 of 35
Integrity: The Administrative Building retains moderately high physical integrity, including location, design, feeling, and association. The building has retained its original location since construction after the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and has not been relocated. The design of the building has also remained intact as the space, proportion, scale, ornamentation are still extant as they were originally designed and are representative of both post-Long Beach earthquake campus planning and Streamline Moderne horizontal emphasis. Since the Administration building retains the majority of its original design elements and setting, the historic character is intact and the feeling of the campus as a 1930s Streamline Moderne historic campus is still apparent. Additionally, this presence of the physical features that convey the property's historic character as a 1930s Streamline Moderne campus helps it to retain its quality of association with this time period. It has lost a degree of physical integrity of materials and workmanship due to the removal of the original metal lettering above the main entrance and the interior modifications, and has also suffered some degree of loss of setting due to the addition of new school buildings on the campus and changes to the surrounding community.
Period of Significance: 1937-1945
Auditorium Year Built: 1937 Architectural Style: Streamline Moderne
The Auditorium façade faces south towards West 12th Street. It is one story in height at this elevation and is comprised of a concrete exterior and a rectangular form. The roof contains a stepped parapet with string cornice detailing along this elevation, with the central portion projecting higher than the west and east projecting bays of the building. The projecting bays feature four thin courses of horizontal band detailing at the east and west wall junctions that wrap around to the east and west elevations of these projections. The central portion is heavily recessed and features a large concrete curved awning with four decorative modillions underneath. There are three flush metal double-door entries beneath this awning. Above this awning the words “Rosalyn S. Heyman AUDITORIUM” are affixed in metal moderne lettering along horizontal courses. A concrete staircase of nine steps leads up to the auditorium entrance, and is anchored by two large angular concrete built-in planters.
The west elevation of the auditorium is largely unadorned and has two rectangular windows on the north bay, one six-over-six and one narrow four-over-four, recessed behind metal security grates. The same four horizontal band detailing from the façade extends along the upper portion of the southern bay. There are heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) units encased in metal chain link fences along this elevation. The center of this elevation has three large rectangular windows filled in to prevent light entering and one with a large louvered ventilator. There is a flush metal double door entry with large concrete surrounds to the north of these windows. The north end of this elevation has a similar bay projection as the south elevation with the same horizontal band detailing.
The north elevation of the Auditorium contains a small concrete staircase for entrance to the first level, and a concrete staircase with metal railing leading down to the basement level. There is a set of paired four-over- four single-hung windows recessed behind a metal security grate on each end of this elevation. There is large metal storage bin on the east end that is placed adjacent to the wall. The east elevation of the Auditorium has the same minimal unadorned detailing as the west elevation with the north end of displaying the similar bay projection as the south elevation with the same horizontal band detailing. There is landscaping and planters along this elevation, and the south end features the covered walkway connection to the Administration Building. The historic integrity of the exterior of the building is good, with most original materials appearing to be intact.
The interior of the Auditorium is comprised of the auditorium itself, a stage, a backstage area, a basement with dressing rooms and storage area, a foyer, and restrooms. The foyer has laminate tiling, curved walls,
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 12 of 35 crown molding, decorative pilasters, a water fountain, and a glass display case. There are two double door entries leading to the auditorium which contains three sections of wooden chair row seating. The stage is defined by a wood paneled proscenium, curved ceiling molding and large decorative pilasters. There are large decorative hanging pendant lights as well as a large moderne style rectangular ceiling light. The dressing room and storage areas feature laminate flooring, plaster walls. Overall, the historic integrity of the interior of the building is good, with most original materials appearing to be intact.
Evaluation:
Criterion A/1. The resource is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. Per the LAUSD Historic Context, for a post-1933 Long Beach earthquake school to be eligible under Criterion A/1 it must exemplify: 1) the post-Long Beach earthquake school planning and design concepts of the period, including the 1934 Field Act; 2) be a one-story elementary school or two-story middle or high school, and 3) retain most of the associative and character-defining features of the period. The LAUSD context notes these character-defining features for the period as two-story massing, reinforced concrete and steel frame construction, classroom wings designed for easy access to outdoors with L-, H-, T-shaped building plans, generous expanses of windows, stylistically more streamline and less ornamental than earlier architectural styles.
The Auditorium appears to reflect several of these characteristics, such as smooth concrete construction, generous expanses of windows, and Streamline Modern styling. As such, it exemplifies the response to the reconstruction of public schools following the Long Beach Earthquake in 1933, as well as the expansion of existing schools in anticipation of rapid residential growth in the vicinity. As a strong representative of the period of reconstruction following the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and reflecting its key elements of design and style, the Berendo Middle School Auditorium is recommended eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion A/1 of its association with post-1933 Long Beach earthquake construction.
Criterion B/2. The resource is associated with the lives of significant persons in our past; or associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history. Research did not reveal a noteworthy association with persons significant in our past. Criterion B/2 applies to properties associated with individuals whose specific contributions to history can be identified and documented. Persons “significant in our past” refers to individuals whose activities are demonstrably important within a local, state, or national historical context. The criterion is generally restricted to those properties that illustrate (rather than commemorate) a person's important achievements and productive life, and must be the property that is most closely associated with that person. Each property associated with an important individual should be compared to other associated properties to identify those that best represent the person's historic contributions (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002). While the school did produce several notable alumni, such as author Ray Bradbury, WWII hero Jimmy Doolittle, entertainer Edgar Bergen, jazz musician J.J. Higgins, and several Olympians/athletes, actors, and future LAUSD administrators, none of these person’s derives their notoriety from their association with Berendo Middle School. The Auditorium is named after Rosalyn S. Heyman, a former principal of the school and assistant superintendent in the District; however, the Auditorium is not reflective of or associated with the significance of her life or work (Individuals involved in the design or construction of the building are discussed under Criterion C/3.) Therefore, the Berendo Middle School Auditorium is recommended not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion B/2.
Criterion C/3. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. Criterion C/3 applies to properties significant for their physical design or construction, including such elements as architecture, landscape architecture, engineering, and artwork. To be eligible under Criterion C/3, a property must meet at least one of the following requirements: embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; possess high
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 13 of 35 artistic value; or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The first requirement, that properties “embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction,” refers to the way in which a property was conceived, designed, or fabricated by a people or culture in past periods of history. “The work of a master” refers to the technical or aesthetic achievements of an architect or craftsman. “High artistic values” concerns the expression of aesthetic ideals or preferences and applies to aesthetic achievement. A structure is eligible as a specimen of its type or period of construction if it is an important example (within its context) of building practices of a particular time in history (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002).
The Auditorium does appear to embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction. The building reflects the Streamline Moderne architectural style:
The Streamline Moderne became a popular style during the Great Depression and World War II period. Its clean lines and minimalist ornament both celebrated the modern machineage and signaled the period of austerity triggered by the Great Depression. Compared with its more ornamental predecessor, the Art Deco style, Streamline Moderne is more restrained in its ornamental program and emphasizes the horizontal rather than the vertical. This is achieved through incorporating bands of windows, decorative raised or grooved horizontal lines, flat canopies with banded fascia, and narrow coping at the roofline. Other characteristics include smooth wall surfaces, usually clad in stucco, glass block or porthole windows, and rounded corners. Reference to aerodynamic design is a signature of the style (Sapphos, 2014).
The Auditorium reflects the architectural detailing of the Streamline Moderne style, including flat roof, concrete construction with smooth wall surface, horizontal massing emphasized by string courses, horizontal bandings, and sill courses, metal lettering on the façade and curved walls and lighting of the foyer and auditorium.
Architects Edward Cray Taylor and Ellis Wing Taylor designed the Auditorium. The Taylor brothers are considered master craftsmen and architects for their extensive and significant work in Southern California, and are listed as Master Architects for the City of Beverly Hills. While the two men gained prominence from their work on Douglas Aircraft Santa Monica facilities, Wolfer Printing Company Office in Orange County, and the Masonic Temple in Yuma, AZ (listed in the NRHP). The Taylor brothers did not gain prominence from their association with Berendo Middle School. In order to meet Criterion C/3 for association with a master craftsman, the building must reflect the significance of the individual’s body of work. The Auditorium at Berendo Middle School does not significantly represent the Taylor brothers’ body of work.
The Berendo Middle School Auditorium is recommended eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion C/3 for its architectural distinction.
Criterion D/4..That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory of the local area, California or the nation. Criterion D/4 asks whether a property has the potential to yield information important to prehistory or history. While most often applied to archaeological districts and sites, Criterion D/4 can also apply to buildings, structures, and objects that contain important information. In order for these types of properties to be eligible under Criterion D/4, they themselves must be, or must have been, the principal source of the important information (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002). The Auditorium does not appear to yield significant information that would expand our current knowledge or theories of design, methods of construction, operation, or other information that is not already known. Therefore, the Auditorium is recommended not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion D/4.
Integrity: The Auditorium retains moderately high physical integrity, including location, design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The building has retained its original location since construction after the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and has not been relocated. The design of the building has also remained intact as the space, proportion, scale, ornamentation are still extant as they were originally designed and are representative of both post-Long Beach earthquake campus planning and Streamline Moderne horizontal
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 14 of 35 emphasis. Since the Auditorium retains the majority of its original design elements and setting, the historic character is intact and the feeling of the campus as a 1930s Streamline Moderne historic campus is still apparent. Additionally, this presence of the physical features that convey the property's historic character as a 1930s Streamline Moderne campus helps it to retain its quality of association with this time period. It has lost a degree of physical integrity of setting due to the addition of new school buildings on the campus and changes to the surrounding community.
Period of Significance: 1937-1945
Cafeteria Year Built: 1937 Architectural Style: Streamline Moderne
The Cafeteria is located within the bend of the L-shaped Administration Building. It is comprised of concrete and has a square form, with a curved wall at the southeastern corner. There are three entrances to the cafeteria, two symmetrical in design and one from the covered eating area on the north elevation. The entrances on the south and east of the building are connected via covered walkway to the Administration Building. These entrances have large flush metal double-doors with a large multipane rectangular transom. The covered walkway is comprised of concrete and provides the opportunity a horizontal design extension from the string and sill courses on the Administration Building. As a result the Cafeteria features a large band course, a sill course, a decorative cornice, and a foundation with a sill course ledgement all wrapping around the exterior of the building. The southeast curved corner of the building displays a band of five rectangular two over two single-hung windows recessed behind metal security grates.
The north elevation of the cafeteria features the 1969 addition of the covered wooden lunch shelter. This elevation contains metal roll-up windows that lead to the cafeteria kitchens, providing outdoor access to food for lunch. There are metal railings in place to help form food lines leading to the lunch windows. There are several flush metal doors that lead into the interior of the cafeteria building, which is primarily utilized for food storage, kitchen, and teachers eating area. There are many outdoor seating tables under the shelter addition for student seating. The interior of the cafeteria building, as previously mentioned, is not used for student eating, likely due to capacity constraints. The interior features tile flooring, plaster walls, fluorescent lighting, and built in kitchen cabinetry. Overall, the historic integrity of the interior and exterior of the building is in good condition, with most original materials appearing to be intact.
Evaluation:
Criterion A/1. The resource is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. Per the LAUSD Historic Context, for a post-1933 Long Beach earthquake school to be eligible under Criterion A/1 it must exemplify: 1) the post-Long Beach earthquake school planning and design concepts of the period, including the 1934 Field Act; 2) be a one-story elementary school or two-story middle or high school, and 3) retain most of the associative and character-defining features of the period. The LAUSD context notes these character-defining features for the period as two-story massing, reinforced concrete and steel frame construction, classroom wings designed for easy access to outdoors with L-, H-, T-shaped building plans, generous expanses of windows, stylistically more streamline and less ornamental than earlier architectural styles.
The Cafeteria appears to reflect several of these characteristics, such as smooth concrete construction, generous expanses of windows, and Streamline Modern styling. As such, it exemplifies the response to the reconstruction of public schools following the Long Beach Earthquake in 1933, as well as the expansion of existing schools in anticipation of rapid residential growth in the vicinity. As a strong representative of the period of reconstruction following the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and reflecting its key elements of design and style, the Berendo Middle School Cafeteria is recommended eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 15 of 35 Criterion A/1 of its association with post-1933 Long Beach earthquake construction.
Criterion B/2. The resource is associated with the lives of significant persons in our past; or associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history. Research did not reveal a noteworthy association with persons significant in our past. Criterion B/2 applies to properties associated with individuals whose specific contributions to history can be identified and documented. Persons “significant in our past” refers to individuals whose activities are demonstrably important within a local, state, or national historical context. The criterion is generally restricted to those properties that illustrate (rather than commemorate) a person's important achievements and productive life, and must be the property that is most closely associated with that person. Each property associated with an important individual should be compared to other associated properties to identify those that best represent the person's historic contributions (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002). While the school did produce several notable alumni, such as author Ray Bradbury, WWII hero Jimmy Doolittle, entertainer Edgar Bergen, jazz musician J.J. Higgins, and several Olympians/athletes, actors, and future LAUSD administrators, none of these person’s derives their notoriety from their association with Berendo Middle School. (Individuals involved in the design or construction of the building are discussed under Criterion C/3.) Therefore, the Berendo Middle School Cafeteria is recommended not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion B/2.
Criterion C/3. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. Criterion C/3 applies to properties significant for their physical design or construction, including such elements as architecture, landscape architecture, engineering, and artwork. To be eligible under Criterion C/3, a property must meet at least one of the following requirements: embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; possess high artistic value; or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The first requirement, that properties “embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction,” refers to the way in which a property was conceived, designed, or fabricated by a people or culture in past periods of history. “The work of a master” refers to the technical or aesthetic achievements of an architect or craftsman. “High artistic values” concerns the expression of aesthetic ideals or preferences and applies to aesthetic achievement. A structure is eligible as a specimen of its type or period of construction if it is an important example (within its context) of building practices of a particular time in history (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002).
The Auditorium does appear to embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction. The building reflects the Streamline Moderne architectural style:
The Streamline Moderne became a popular style during the Great Depression and World War II period. Its clean lines and minimalist ornament both celebrated the modern machineage and signaled the period of austerity triggered by the Great Depression. Compared with its more ornamental predecessor, the Art Deco style, Streamline Moderne is more restrained in its ornamental program and emphasizes the horizontal rather than the vertical. This is achieved through incorporating bands of windows, decorative raised or grooved horizontal lines, flat canopies with banded fascia, and narrow coping at the roofline. Other characteristics include smooth wall surfaces, usually clad in stucco, glass block or porthole windows, and rounded corners. Reference to aerodynamic design is a signature of the style (Sapphos, 2014).
The Cafeteria reflects the architectural detailing of the Streamline Moderne style, including flat roof, concrete construction with smooth wall surface, horizontal massing emphasized by string courses, horizontal bandings, and sill courses, larger horizontal multilight windows, and curved corners at the southeast wall junction.
Architects Edward Cray Taylor and Ellis Wing Taylor designed the Cafeteria. The Taylor brothers are considered master craftsmen and architects for their extensive and significant work in Southern California,
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 16 of 35 and are listed as Master Architects for the City of Beverly Hills. While the two men gained prominence from their work on Douglas Aircraft Santa Monica facilities, Wolfer Printing Company Office in Orange County, and the Masonic Temple in Yuma, AZ (listed in the NRHP). The Taylor brothers did not gain prominence from their association with Berendo Middle School. In order to meet Criterion C/3 for association with a master craftsman, the building must reflect the significance of the individual’s body of work. The Cafeteria at Berendo Middle School does not significantly represent the Taylor brothers’ body of work.
The Berendo Middle School Cafeteria is recommended eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion C/3 for its architectural distinction.
Criterion D/4. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory of the local area, California or the nation. Criterion D/4 asks whether a property has the potential to yield information important to prehistory or history. While most often applied to archaeological districts and sites, Criterion D/4 can also apply to buildings, structures, and objects that contain important information. In order for these types of properties to be eligible under Criterion D/4, they themselves must be, or must have been, the principal source of the important information (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002). The Cafeteria does not appear to yield significant information that would expand our current knowledge or theories of design, methods of construction, operation, or other information that is not already known. Therefore, the Cafeteria is recommended not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion D/4.
Integrity: The Cafeteria retains moderately high physical integrity, including location, design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The building has retained its original location since construction after the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and has not been relocated. The design of the building has also remained intact as the space, proportion, scale, ornamentation are still extant as they were originally designed and are representative of both post-Long Beach earthquake campus planning and Streamline Moderne horizontal emphasis. Since the Cafeteria retains the majority of its original design elements and setting, the historic character is intact and the feeling of the campus as a 1930s Streamline Moderne historic campus is still apparent. Additionally, this presence of the physical features that convey the property's historic character as a 1930s Streamline Moderne campus helps it to retain its quality of association with this time period. It has lost a degree of physical integrity of setting due to the addition of new school buildings on the campus and changes to the surrounding community.
Period of Significance: 1937-1945
Physical Education Building Year Built: 1937 Architectural Style: Utilitarian
The Physical Education Building is located further north of the previously mentioned cluster of historic campus buildings. The building is rectangular in form, is two stories tall and is made of concrete, and stylistically unadorned. The building is located down a concrete stairway north of the Administration Building. There are entrances on the north and south elevations of the building. The south elevation entry has an eight bay arrangement of a combination of large multipane fixed and awning windows and a set flush metal double-doors and a single flush metal door. There is a thin concrete chimney stack affixed to this elevation. The west elevation of the Physical Education Building feature two large multipane fixed and awning windows on the second story, and three rectangular vertical windows recessed behind thick metal security grates. The north elevation has an eight bay arrangement of a combination of large multipane fixed and awning windows and two sets of flush metal double-doors for entry. There is a projecting one-story wing on the east end of this elevation featuring an additional flush metal door entry. The east elevation has a two bay arrangement of large multipane fixed and awning windows on the first and second stories. This east elevation faces towards South Berendo Street. There is a large amount of encased electrical wiring and piping along each elevation of the building, as well as security lighting and HVAC units. Additionally several of the windows have been replaced. The historic integrity of the exterior of the building is fair, with some
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 17 of 35 original materials appearing to be intact.
The interior of the Physical Education Building features a gymnasium, weightlifting room, storage areas, locker rooms, offices and restrooms. The majority of the interior has square laminate tiling that is in disrepair or has been replaced on multiple occasions, creating mismatched tiling. The ceiling of the gymnasium has acoustical paneling, a lot of which has fallen down, exposing the concrete underneath. The weightlifting room has rubber flooring that is also in disrepair and exposes the concrete underneath. Many of the original windows have been periodically replaced over time, creating a mismatch of window glass style. The original lockers have been replaced in the locker rooms. The tile and showers in the locker rooms appear to be original and intact. Overall, the historic integrity of the interior of the building is in poor condition, with most original materials appearing to be replaced or in disrepair.
Evaluation:
Criterion A/1. The resource is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. Per the LAUSD Historic Context, for a post-1933 Long Beach earthquake school to be eligible under Criterion A/1 it must exemplify: 1) the post-Long Beach earthquake school planning and design concepts of the period, including the 1934 Field Act; 2) be a one-story elementary school or two-story middle or high school, and 3) retain most of the associative and character-defining features of the period. The LAUSD context notes these character-defining features for the period as two-story massing, reinforced concrete and steel frame construction, classroom wings designed for easy access to outdoors with L-, H-, T-shaped building plans, generous expanses of windows, stylistically more streamline and less ornamental than earlier architectural styles.
The Physical Education Building, built during the post-1933 Long Beach earthquake construction period, exemplifies a few of the character-defining features for the period such as two-story massing, reinforced concrete and steel frame construction, generous expanses of windows, and is less ornamental in design. However, the building is located further north from the historic core and is separated topographically from the other historic period buildings. It is less ornamental than previous campus architectural styles, but to the degree that it would be recognized as utilitarian as it does not exemplify Streamline Moderne detailing or design. Further, the Physical Education building is in poor condition and as a result suffers a lack of integrity in its design components. As a result, the Berendo Middle School Physical Education Building is recommended not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion A/1.
Criterion B/2. The resource is associated with the lives of significant persons in our past; or associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history. Research did not reveal a noteworthy association with persons significant in our past. Criterion B/2 applies to properties associated with individuals whose specific contributions to history can be identified and documented. Persons “significant in our past” refers to individuals whose activities are demonstrably important within a local, state, or national historical context. The criterion is generally restricted to those properties that illustrate (rather than commemorate) a person's important achievements and productive life, and must be the property that is most closely associated with that person. Each property associated with an important individual should be compared to other associated properties to identify those that best represent the person's historic contributions (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002). While the school did produce several notable alumni, such as author Ray Bradbury, WWII hero Jimmy Doolittle, entertainer Edgar Bergen, jazz musician J.J. Higgins, and several Olympians/athletes, actors, and future LAUSD administrators, none of these person’s derives their notoriety from their association with Berendo Middle School. (Individuals involved in the design or construction of the building are discussed under Criterion C/3.) Therefore, the Berendo Middle School Physical Education Building is recommended not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion B/2.
Criterion C/3. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 18 of 35 represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. Criterion C/3 applies to properties significant for their physical design or construction, including such elements as architecture, landscape architecture, engineering, and artwork. To be eligible under Criterion C/3, a property must meet at least one of the following requirements: embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; possess high artistic value; or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The first requirement, that properties “embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction,” refers to the way in which a property was conceived, designed, or fabricated by a people or culture in past periods of history. “The work of a master” refers to the technical or aesthetic achievements of an architect or craftsman. “High artistic values” concerns the expression of aesthetic ideals or preferences and applies to aesthetic achievement. A structure is eligible as a specimen of its type or period of construction if it is an important example (within its context) of building practices of a particular time in history (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002).
The Physical Education Building appears to embody the distinctive characteristics of the Utilitarian architectural style. As the name suggests, the function of Utilitarian buildings usually dictated their design, in this case a gymnasium and related locker rooms and offices. Such structures are usually constructed with inexpensive materials and showcase limited applied detail and were designed for efficiency. However, while the Physical Education Building has retained the basic features conveying its massing it has replaced the majority of the features that once characterized its style, such as replaced or broken windows and doors, and loss of the integrity of most of the original interior surfaces, such as broken/replaced tile and missing ceiling panels. Further, the addition of outdoor electrical wiring and piping has altered the overall exterior of the buildings original façades as well.
Architects Edward Cray Taylor and Ellis Wing Taylor designed the Physical Education Building. The Taylor brothers are considered master craftsmen and architects for their extensive and significant work in Southern California, and are listed as Master Architects for the City of Beverly Hills. While the two men gained prominence from their work on Douglas Aircraft Santa Monica facilities, Wolfer Printing Company Office in Orange County, and the Masonic Temple in Yuma, AZ (listed in the NRHP). The Taylor brothers did not gain prominence from their association with Berendo Middle School. In order to meet Criterion C/3 for association with a master craftsman, the building must reflect the significance of the individual’s body of work. The Physical Education Building at Berendo Middle School does not significantly represent the Taylor brothers’ body of work. Therefore, the Physical Education Building is recommended not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion C/3.
Criterion D/4.That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory of the local area, California or the nation. Criterion D/4 asks whether a property has the potential to yield information important to prehistory or history. While most often applied to archaeological districts and sites, Criterion D/4 can also apply to buildings, structures, and objects that contain important information. In order for these types of properties to be eligible under Criterion D/4, they themselves must be, or must have been, the principal source of the important information (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2002). The Physical Education does not appear to yield significant information that would expand our current knowledge or theories of design, methods of construction, operation, or other information that is not already known. Therefore, the Physical Education Building is recommended not eligible for the NRHP/CRHR under Criterion D/4.
Integrity: The Physical Education Building retains some physical integrity, in terms of location, design, and feeling. The building has retained its original location since construction after the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and has not been relocated. The design of the building has also remained intact as the space, proportion, scale, are still extant as they were originally designed. The utilitarian feeling of the Physical Education Building is still intact and it still represents the feeling of a gymnasium, however this feeling is degraded by the worn down areas and haphazardly replaced materials of the building. Additionally, this degradation of the physical features that convey the property's historic character as a 1930s gymnasium further separates its ability it to retain its quality of association with this time period, as well as with the other
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 19 of 35 historic buildings on the campus. The Physical Education Building has lost a large degree of physical integrity of materials and workmanship due to replaced or broken windows and doors, and loss of the integrity of most of the original interior surfaces, such as broken/replaced tile and missing ceiling panels. Further some degree of setting has been lost due to the addition of new school buildings on the campus and changes to the surrounding community.
Photographs:
Figure 1. Administration Building façade, facing northwest.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 20 of 35
Figure 2. South elevation of the Administration Building, facing northwest.
Figure 3. West elevation of the Administration Building and connecting walkway to the Auditorium, facing northeast.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 21 of 35
Figure 4. North elevation, L-shape junction, and exterior courtyard of the Administration Building, facing southeast.
Figure 5. West elevation of the L-shaped Administration Building and connecting walkway to the Cafeteria, facing northeast.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 22 of 35
Figure 6. Courtyard area between Cafeteria and Administration Building, facing east.
Figure 7. North elevation of the Administration Building, facing south.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 23 of 35
Figure 8. East elevation of the Administration Building, facing northwest.
Figure 9. Administration Building, hallway interior detail.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 24 of 35
Figure 10. Administration Building, classroom interior detail.
Figure 11. Administration Building, library interior detail.
Auditorium:
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 25 of 35
Figure 12. Auditorium façade, facing northwest.
Figure 13. West elevation, south end of the Auditorium, facing east.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 26 of 35
Figure 14. West elevation, north end, of the Auditorium, facing northeast.
Figure 15. North elevation of the Auditorium, facing east.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 27 of 35
Figure 16. East elevation of the Auditorium, facing south.
Figure 17. Interior of the Auditorium, foyer detail.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 28 of 35
Figure 18. Auditorium interior detail.
Cafeteria:
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 29 of 35 Figure 19. South elevation of Cafeteria and covered walkway leading from Administration building, facing north.
Figure 20. Curved wall and connecting walkway to Administration Building, of southeastern corner of Cafeteria, facing north.
Figure 21. North elevation of Cafeteria and 1969 covered lunch area addition.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 30 of 35
Figure 22. Cafeteria kitchen detail.
Figure 23. Cafeteria interior dining detail.
Physical Education Building:
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 31 of 35
Figure 24. Physical Education Building, south elevation, facing north.
Figure 25. Physical Education Building, west elevation, facing northeast.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 32 of 35
Figure 26. Physical Education Building, north elevation, facing south.
Figure 26. Physical Education Building, east elevation, facing northwest.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 33 of 35
Figure 27. Physical Education Building, gymnasium interior.
Figure 28. Physical Education Building, weight room detail.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 34 of 35
Figure 29. Physical Education Building, flooring detail.
* B1 2 . References:
Baker, Lindsay, “A History of School Design and Its Indoor Environmental Standards, 1900 to Today,” PhD Dissertation (Berkeley: Department of Architecture, Center for the Built Environment, University of California, Berkeley, January 2012).
Bariscale, Floyd B. “Big Orange Landmarks: Exploring the Landmarks of Los Angeles, One Monument at a Time, No. 161 - Wolfer Printing Company Building” posted Saturday, July 12, 2008. Accessed at http://bigorangelandmarks.blogspot.com/2008/07/no-161-wolfer-printing-company-building.html on August 16, 2015, 2008.
Berendo Middle School, History of Berendo. Accessed at http://www.berendoms.us/history-of-berendo/ on August 16, 2015.
City of Beverly Hills, List of Local Master Architects. Accessed at https://www.beverlyhills.org/.../ListofMasterArchitects.pdf on August 16, 2015.
Eales, John R., “A Brief, General History of the Los Angeles City School System,” Doctoral Dissertation (Los Angeles: University of California, June 1956), 78.
Heumann, Leslie J. SAIC, Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms, Berendo Middle School, March 2002.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013) State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Propert y Name: ____Berendo Middle School______Page 35 of 35 Heyman, Rosalyn S., “Lessons I Learned Along the Way,” Colleague Vol. 29, No. 2, Fall-Winter 2012.
Los Angeles City Board of Education, The Reconstruction Program of the Los Angeles City Schools, 1933 – 1935 (inclusive) (Los Angeles, CA: 1933), 5.
Los Angeles Times (LAT) 1934 “Safety, Simplicity and Old-California Beauty Combined in Mission-Type Schools of Reconstruction Program,” Los Angeles Times, 9 January 1934.
Los Angeles Times (LAT) 1936 “School Structural Program Advanced $2,781,523: Seven Contracts at$1,352,523 Awarded; Bids on $1,429,000 Structures Asked,” Los Angeles Times, 27 September 1936.
Los Angeles Times (LAT) 1951 “E. W. Taylor, Designer of Plane Factories, Dies: Douglas and Consolidated Plants Built by Architect and Structural Engineer,” Los Angeles Times, 21 January 1951.
NETR Historic Aerials. Accessed online at www.historicaerials.com on August 12 and 13, 2015.
Sapphos Environmental, Inc., City of Long Beach Historic Context Statement, prepared for the City of Long Beach Department of Development Services (Long Beach, CA, 2009).
Sapphos Environmental, Inc., Los Angeles Unified School District Historic Context Statement, 1870 to 1969, prepared for the Los Angeles Unified School District Office of Environmental Health and Safety (Los Angeles, CA, March 2014).
USGS Historic Topographic Maps. Accessed online at the “Map Locator & Downloader” http://store.usgs.gov/b2c_usgs/usgs/maplocator/(ctype=areaDetails&xcm=r3standardpitrex_prd& carea=%24ROOT&layout=6_1_61_48&uiarea=2)/.do on August 12 and 13, 2015.
Withey, Henry F., Biographical Dictionary of American Architects (Deceased). Page 290. Accessed at http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015007571188 on August 16, 2015, 1956.
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(W or d 9/2013)
ATTACHMENT 2: Figure 1 – Berendo Middle School Contributors
Signi cant (Primary) Building Signi cant (Primary) Landscape Contributing (Secondary) Building Non-Contributing Building and Landscape
0 100
Feet
LAUSD Berendo Middle School . 211085.20 SOURCE: LAUSD Figure 1 Berendo Middle School Contributors
September 16, 2016
Mr. Edward S. Paek, AICP, CEQA Project Manager/Contract Professional LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Office of Environmental Health and Safety 333 South Beaudry Avenue, 21st Floor Los Angeles, California 90017
Subject: Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI) Standards Review for LAUSD Berendo Middle School Facilities Improvement Project, 1157 S. Berendo Street, Los Angeles, California
Dear Mr. Paek:
ESA PCR has reviewed the plans for the proposed Berendo Middle School Facilities Improvement Project (“Project”) for the Los Angeles Unified School District (“LAUSD”) at Berendo Middle School (“Berendo MS” or “Campus”) located at 1157 S. Berendo Street in Los Angeles, California. In 2002 and 2015, the Campus was recommended eligible for listing in both the National Register of Historic Places (“National Register”) and the California Register of Historical Resources (“California Register”). Under the proposed plans, prepared by CO Architects on August 2, 2016, the Project would include the construction of a new two-story gymnasium building with the development of adjacent site works and athletic fields; the construction of a new accessible entrance to the existing Administration Building; the relocation and renovation of a health clinic on the first floor of the existing Administration Building; and the renovation of the boys’ and girls’ restrooms on the first floor of the existing Administration Building.
ESA PCR’s historic resources practice group staff Margarita Jerabek, Ph.D., Director of Historic Resources, and Amanda Y. Kainer, M.S., Senior Architectural Historian, reviewed the Project design for conformance to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (“SOI Standards”).1 This letter report was prepared for compliance with CEQA, School Upgrade Program EIR (September 2015), the SOI Standards, and LAUSD’s guidelines for the management and treatment of historic resources.
CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES In October 2015, ESA prepared a Character-Defining Features Memorandum (“CDFM”) for Berendo MS.2 The primary period of significance for Berendo MS, which features the WPA Moderne style, is 1937 (its initial construction date, after the Long beach Earthquake) to 1945 (the onset of World War II). The Administration Building, site plan, and specific landscape features (set-backs of Administration Building and Auditorium, covered connecting walkways, and courtyard between Administration Building and Cafeteria) were identified as significant (primary) buildings and features, while the Auditorium and Cafeteria were identified as contributing (secondary) buildings. The Physical Education Building and all post-1945 buildings were identified as non- contributors. For each significant (primary) or contributing (secondary) building and landscape, ESA identified
1 Department of Interior regulations, 36 CFR 67. 2 ESA, “Cultural Resources Consulting for Berendo Middle School Facilities Improvement Project - Character-Defining Features Memorandum,” prepared for LAUSD, Office of Environmental Health and Safety (October 27, 2015). Mr. Edward S. Paek, AICP September 16, 2016 Page 2 features that contribute to the visual character and architectural significance of the building/landscape from its period of significance.
Because the Project would affect only one primary building, the Administration Building, the character-defining features that contribute to the Administration Building’s eligibility as a significant (primary) building are described below. Text in italics (italics) specifies non-contributing alterations/additions.
Significant (Primary): Administration Building3 Concrete construction with smooth wall surface
Rectangular massing with an L-Shaped form which anchors the two other contributing buildings on the southeast corner of the campus
Two-story angled bay primary (southeast) façade which projects outward from two-story primary elevation displaying sculptural relief panels
Flat roof
Horizontal bandings: Specifically the projecting lintel course, currently painted in blue, which wraps the entirety of the building, and the thin double string lintel course just below the lintel course which also wraps the entirety of the building, as well as the additional string courses and base course that also runs along the water table at the base of the building
Large horizontal multi-light windows (Alteration, some windows have been altered or removed due to mechanical HVAC vents and ducts)
Recessed banks of classroom windows, with flat concrete awnings with curved ends, that reinforce the horizontal massing and detailing
Exterior alterations include the addition of ramp on the west end, added metal electrical piping and security lighting and security grates, and plastic Berendo signage on southeast façade, alteration to metal double- doors displaying rectangular transoms behind metal security grates
Interior: Circulation plan, central large two-directional half-landing concrete staircase, wooden flooring in the classrooms, Coffer ceiling with skylights in library, wooden flooring in the classrooms
Interior alterations include renovated and replaced interior spaces, or those in disrepair - such as interior tiling, ceiling panels, lighting fixtures, and doors.
3 Ibid, pgs 4-5. Mr. Edward S. Paek, AICP September 16, 2016 Page 3
PROPOSED PROJECT The Project consists of the construction of a gymnasium building and improvements to the Administration Building. ESA PCR reviewed project plans drawn by CO Architects dated August 2, 2016. The Project would include the construction of a new two-story gymnasium building with the development of adjacent site works and athletic fields. The new gymnasium would be constructed to the rear (north) of the non-contributing shop building and non-contributing portable buildings would be demolished to clear the land for the construction.
There are four proposed improvements to the significant (primary) Administration Building that include:
The construction of a new accessible entrance to the existing Administration Building. A new Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) ramp in front of the west elevation of the admin building is proposed to replace a non-contributing ADA ramp (alteration).
The relocation and renovation of a health clinic on the first floor of the existing Administration Building. A new dedicated single-door entrance on the west elevation of the Administration Building would be inserted into the west elevation. None of the spaces or features within the health clinic area proposed to be remodeled were recommended as character-defining. Two walls dividing three interior spaces would be removed and new partitions wall would be constructed to create the clinic. Two of the corridor door openings (non- contributing) would be infilled to match existing wall in type and construction and one door opening would remain. The remaining door opening would receive a new flat panel door. Two windows on the south elevation would be modified with louvres; the top glass panes are proposed to be removed, the wood frames retained, and louvres would be installed. The windows would be protected during the work. The existing mechanical louver equipment in two of the windows (alterations) occupying the two lower panes would be removed and the window repaired to its original design.
The renovation of the boys’ and girls’ restrooms on the first floor of the existing Administration Building. None of the features within the bathrooms or the spaces themselves proposed to be remodeled were recommended as character-defining. All of the floor, wall and ceiling finishes, plumbing fixtures, stall partitions, restroom accessories, and ceiling fixtures would be removed. Each bathroom has a pair of windows. One window per each bathroom would be affected; the top and bottom panes of the windows would be removed, the wood window frames retained, and louvers would be installed. The windows would be protected during the work. The door openings (non-contributing) would be modified and the doors replaced with flat panel doors.
CEQA GUIDELINES AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in significance of a historical resource as defined in State CEQA §15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact. Berendo MS and its associated landscape has been identified as a property eligible for listing in the National Register and California Register, and is therefore a historical resource for CEQA purposes. According to CEQA, projects which comply with the SOI Standards are presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on historical resources. The District requests a review of the Project to ensure that it Mr. Edward S. Paek, AICP September 16, 2016 Page 4 would comply with SOI Standards. If significant impacts are identified, the District requests recommendations to reduce impacts to a less than significant level through enhanced compliance with the SOI Standards. The CEQA Guidelines and the SOI Standards are outlined within the School Upgrade Program EIR (September 2015).
The Project would retain the essential character-defining buildings, landscapes, features, and spatial relationships of Berendo MS that contribute to the school’s eligibility for listing in the National Register and California Register. The Project would demolish the non-contributing portable buildings in order to build a new two-story gymnasium building and renovate the primary (significant) Administration Building.
Constructed away from the historic campus core, the new two-story gymnasium would not adversely change the existing relationship between the historic buildings and the setting. The new gymnasium would be constructed a considerable distance away from the historic grouping of buildings located at the southeast corner of the lot. The view of the new gymnasium from the historic buildings is buffered by four non-contributing buildings, including a two-story shop building, a one-story utility and music building, and two, two-story classroom buildings. The new gymnasium appears to be the same height as these non-contributing buildings to the south and east. Because the view of the new gymnasium from the historic core would be obscured by the non-contributing buildings, the spatial relationships that characterize Berendo MS would be protected and the Campus would retain integrity. Furthermore, the new gymnasium would be designed in a contemporary style, constructed of modern materials such as glass, metal, concrete and Fiber Reinforced Cement Panels, and clearly differentiated from the WPA Moderne style historic buildings. Therefore, the construction of the new gymnasium would conform to SOI Standards 9 and 10.
The renovation work proposed in the Administration Building would not destroy the historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize and contribute to its eligibility as a historical resource.
The proposed improvements associated with the renovation of the bathrooms and creation of a healthy start clinic in the first floor of the Administration Building would require minimal change to its integrity and character-defining features. To support the renovations, a new doorway would be inserted into the west elevation of the Administration Building in a discreet location that is not visible from the public right-of-way and adjacent to an ADA ramp (alteration). In the future this doorway could be infilled. Four windows on the primary (south) elevation and two windows on the rear (north) elevations would be affected; however, incompatible alterations (louvres) would be removed and the insertion of new louvres would be reversible. The interior renovation work is proposed in areas identified as non-contributing. No other character-defining features are proposed to be removed due to the renovations. Therefore, the rehabilitation of the Administration Building would protect the integrity of the primary character-defining building and the work would conform to the SOI Standards.
In summary, the Project would not materially impair the eligibility of the National Register and California Register eligible Campus, as the character-defining features would be retained and the integrity would be protected. The Project conforms to the intent of all SOI Standards as described in the following section below, and upon Project completion, the Campus would remain eligible as a potential historical resource. Therefore, ESA PCR finds no direct or indirect impacts resulting from the Project to Berendo MS. Mr. Edward S. Paek, AICP September 16, 2016 Page 5
SECRETARY OF INTERIOR’S STANDARDS REVIEW As mentioned above, under CEQA, a project that follows the SOI Standards shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource, and is therefore categorically exempt from CEQA. 4
According to the SOI Standards:
Standard 1: A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
Under the Project, the Campus would continue to be used as a middle school. The construction of a new gymnasium to the northwest of the historic core would not require change to spatial relationships. The proposed improvements associated with the renovation of the bathrooms and creation of a healthy start clinic in the first floor of the Administration Building would require minimal change to the character-defining features of the Administration Building. To support the renovations, a new doorway would be inserted into the west elevation of the Administration Building in an inconspicuous location. Four windows on the primary (south) elevation and two windows on the rear (north) elevations would receive louvres; however, the window frames would be protected and previous louvre alterations would be removed. No other character-defining features are proposed to be removed due to the renovations. As such, the Project requires minimal change to the Berendo MS’s distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships and therefore the Project would conform to Standard 1.
Standard 2: The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
The historic character of the Administration Building would be preserved upon completion of the proposed rehabilitation. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize the Administration Building and contribute to its eligibility as a primary character-defining building would be avoided. Minimal alterations would occur to character-defining features to support the renovations. Four windows on the primary (south) elevation and two windows on the rear (north) elevations would receive louvres; however, the window frames would be protected and previous louvre alterations would be removed. Also, a new doorway would be inserted into the west elevation of the Administration Building in an inconspicuous location. Otherwise, the bathrooms and healthy clinic areas were not identified as character- defining. The Project would result in an improvement in the condition, preserving the historic character of the building, and therefore, would conform to Standard 2.
4 California Environmental Quality Act, (15 C.C.R., sections 15064.5 (3) and 15331) Mr. Edward S. Paek, AICP September 16, 2016 Page 6
Standard 3: Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
The Project is designed so as to recognize the property as a physical record of its own time. As such, it would not add any conjectural features or elements from other historic properties or create a false sense of history. Therefore, the Project would comply with Standard 3.
Standard 4: Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
There is no evidence to suggest that any alterations or additions made to the Campus have acquired significance due to association with significant events or personages or through architectural merit. Therefore, the Project would not result in the removal of features that have acquired significance. As such, the Project would conform to Standard 4.
Standard 5: Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
The Project seeks to maintain and rehabilitate character defining features, such as the wood-frame windows on the north and south elevations. Windows panes are proposed to be inserted into the historic frames, and would therefore be reversible if removed in the future. Therefore, the Project would conform to the intent of Standard 5.
Standard 6: Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
Standard 6 applies to the restoration of the windows on the Administration Building. Incompatible alterations resulting from the insertion of louvres in windows on the north and south elevations would be removed and the window panes reinserted into the window frames. Therefore, the Project would comply with Standard 6.
Standard 7: Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
The in-kind replacement and refinishing of windows on the Administration Building would be undertaken using the gentlest means possible and the work would conform to Standard 7.
Standard 8: Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
The Campus does not appear to contain any potentially significant archeological resources. Therefore, the Project conforms to Standard 8. Mr. Edward S. Paek, AICP September 16, 2016 Page 7
Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale, and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
The new gymnasium would be constructed a considerable distance away from the historic grouping of buildings located at the southeast corner of the lot. The view of the new gymnasium from the historic buildings is buffered by four non-contributing buildings, including a two-story shop building, a one-story utility and music building, and two, two-story classroom buildings. The new gymnasium appears to be the same height as these non- contributing buildings to the south and east. Because the view of the new gymnasium from the historic core would be obscured by the non-contributing buildings, the spatial relationships that characterize Berendo MS would be protected and the Campus would retain integrity. Furthermore, the new gymnasium would be designed in a contemporary style and constructed of modern materials such as glass, metal, concrete and Fiber Reinforced Cement Panels. The new gymnasium would be clearly differentiated from the WPA Moderne style historic buildings.
The renovation work proposed in the Administration Building would not destroy the historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize and contribute to its historical eligibility. A number of exterior windows would be affected; however incompatible alterations would be removed and the insertion of louvres would be reversible. The insertion of a new door on the west elevation would be reversible and would be located on a secondary façade in a discreet location not visible from the public right-of-way. The interior renovation work is proposed in areas identified as non-contributing. The proposed work in the Administration Building would not adversely impact the building’s integrity.
Therefore, upon Project completion, the new work would retain the spatial relationships that characterize the Campus, and would protect the integrity of the National Register and California Register eligible Campus. Therefore, the Project would conform to Standard 9.
Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
The Project proposes to construct a new gymnasium to the northwest of the historic core of school buildings. Non-contributing portables would be demolished to clear the land for construction. If the gymnasium were to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of Berendo MS would be unimpaired and the Campus would remain eligible for the National Register and California Register. Therefore, the Project would comply with Standard 10.
CONCLUSION In summary, the proposed Project would not materially impair the eligibility of the National Register and California Register eligible Campus, as the majority of its character-defining features would be retained and its integrity would be protected. The Project would conform to the intent of all SOI Standards as described in the following section below, and upon Project completion, the Campus would remain eligible as a potential Mr. Edward S. Paek, AICP September 16, 2016 Page 8 historical resource. Therefore, ESA PCR finds no direct or indirect impacts resulting from the Project to Berendo MS.
Should you have any questions or require additional information please feel free to contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Margarita Jerabek Director of Historical Resources
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 5.6000e- 8.4000e- 8.6700e- 3.0000e- 2.0700e- 2.0000e- 2.0900e- 5.5000e- 2.0000e- 5.7000e- 0.0000 1.7300 1.7300 8.0000e- 0.0000 1.7317 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005
Total 5.6000e- 8.4000e- 8.6700e- 3.0000e- 2.0700e- 2.0000e- 2.0900e- 5.5000e- 2.0000e- 5.7000e- 0.0000 1.7300 1.7300 8.0000e- 0.0000 1.7317 004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004 005