Appendix A Initial Study, NOP, and NOP Comment Letters Appendix A.1 Initial Study CITY OF LOS ANGELES OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK ROOM 615, CITY HALL LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT INITIAL STUDY AND CHECKLIST (Article IV B City CEQA Guidelines)

LEAD CITY AGENCY COUNCIL DISTRICT DATE

City of Los Angeles CD-14

RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES

City of Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety, City of Los Angeles Fire Department, City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation, City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, including the Bureaus of Engineering and Sanitation

PROJECT TITLE/NO. CASE NO.

Boyle Heights Mixed Use Community Project

PREVIOUS ACTIONS CASE NO. DOES have significant changes from previous actions.

DOES NOT have significant changes from previous actions. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

The proposed project would provide increased homeownership opportunities, neighborhood-serving retail and office space, civic space, and parks and open space amenities. Specifically, the project would include 4,400 residential units comprised of a minimum of 1,200 rental units and up to 3,200 condominium units. In addition, the project would include approximately 325,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail and office uses and civic uses. The project would also include a civic plaza, an expansive central park, active parks, neighborhood greens, neighborhood playgrounds and landscaped courtyards and pathways. These open space and recreational amenities would include approximately ten acres of public common useable open space. Overall, the project is intended to provide a walkable, family-oriented community with modern amenities and a high- quality design that promotes sustainability. Also refer to Attachment A.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING:

As discussed in Attachment A, the project site is located in an urbanized area surrounded by a mix of residential, commercial, educational and industrial uses.

PROJECT LOCATION

The project site is located in the Boyle Heights community and is generally bounded by 8th Street to the north, Olympic Boulevard to the south, Grande Vista to the east and Soto Street to the west. Also refer to Attachment A.

PLANNING DISTRICT STATUS: PRELIMINARY Boyle Heights PROPOSED ______ADOPTED date EXISTING ZONING MAX. DENSITY ZONING DOES CONFORM TO PLAN RD1.5-1 1,771 units; 2,391 w/density bonus PLANNED LAND USE & ZONE MAX. DENSITY PLAN DOES NOT CONFORM TO PLAN Boyle Heights Mixed Use Specific Plan 4,400 units; 325,000 sq.ft. non-resid. SURROUNDING LAND USES PROJECT DENSITY NO DISTRICT PLAN Commercial, Industrial, & Residential

 DETERMINATION (To be completed by Lead Agency)

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions on the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

______

SIGNATURE TITLE

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:

1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants based on a project-specific screening analysis).

2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less that significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of a mitigation measure has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analysis," cross referenced). 5) Earlier analysis must be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR, or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: 1) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. 2) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. 3) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant With Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated 7) Supporting Information Sources: A sources list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whichever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: 1) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and 2) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services

Agricultural Resources Hydrology/Water Quality Recreation

Air Quality Land Use/Planning Transportation/Traffic

Biological Resources Mineral Resources Utilities/Service Systems

Cultural Resources (Historic Resources) Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance

Geology/Soils Population/Housing

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST (To be completed by the Lead City Agency)

 BACKGROUND

PROPONENT NAME PHONE NUMBER

Fifteen Group Land and Development (Contact: Steven G. Fink) (213) 489-4800

PROPONENT ADDRESS

888 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 640, Los Angeles, CA 90017

AGENCY REQUIRING CHECKLIST DATE SUBMITTED

City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning

PROPOSAL NAME (If Applicable)

(Explanations of all potentially and less than significant impacts are  ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS required to be attached on separate sheets)

Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Impact Mitigation Significant Impact No Impact Incorporated I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings, or other locally recognized desirable aesthetic natural feature within a city- designated scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract? c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?

III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SCAQMD or Congestion Management Plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the air basin is non-attainment (ozone, carbon monoxide, & PM 10) under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?

Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Impact Mitigation Significant Impact No Impact Incorporated IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in the City or regional plans, policies, regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance (e.g., oak trees or California walnut woodlands)? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in significance of a historical resource as defined in State CEQA §15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to State CEQA §15064.5? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving : i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides?

Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Impact Mitigation Significant Impact No Impact Incorporated b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potential result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?

VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?

VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project result in: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?

Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Impact Mitigation Significant Impact No Impact Incorporated b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned land uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in an manner which would result in flooding on- or off site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g. Place housing within a 100-year flood plain as mapped on federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100-year flood plain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?

IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?

X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?

XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:

Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Impact Mitigation Significant Impact No Impact Incorporated a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise in level in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of people to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks? e. Other governmental services (including roads)?

XIV. RECREATION. a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might

Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Impact Mitigation Significant Impact No Impact Incorporated have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

XV. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project: a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?

XVI. UTILITIES. Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resource, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? h. Other utilities and service systems?

Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Impact Mitigation Significant Impact No Impact Incorporated XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects). c. Does the project have environmental effects which cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

 DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Attach additional sheets if necessary) PREPARED BY TITLE TELEPHONE # DATE

ATTACHMENT A PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1. INTRODUCTION

Thurman Interim California, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company through its affiliate, Fifteen Group Land and Development (the “Applicant”), plans to redevelop an approximately 68.8-acre property in the Boyle Heights community of the City of Los Angeles that is currently developed with 1,187 units of rental housing. The proposed project would provide considerable amounts of new housing units that will include increased homeownership opportunities, neighborhood-serving retail and office space, civic space and greens and open space amenities. Specifically, the project would include up to 4,400 residential units comprised of no less than 1,200 rental units and up to 3,200 condominium units, and 325,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail and office uses and civic uses. Upon completion of the project, there would be no net loss of rental housing units within the project site, as compared to current conditions. In addition, the project would include a civic plaza, an expansive central park, active parks, neighborhood greens, neighborhood playgrounds and landscaped courtyards and pathways. The green space and recreational amenities would include approximately 10 acres of privately maintained, publicly available, common useable open space and parks. In addition, courtyards, plaza and open spaces accessible to project residents would comprise an additional 11 acres of open space amenities. Overall, the project is intended to provide a walkable, family- oriented community with modern amenities and a high-quality design that promotes sustainability.

2. PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING

The project site is located in the southwestern portion of the Boyle Heights Community of the City of Los Angeles. As shown in Figure A-1 on page A-2, the project site is located approximately 14.5 miles east of the Pacific Ocean, two miles east of downtown Los Angeles and approximately 0.4 miles east of the Los Angeles River. Nearby jurisdictions include the unincorporated East Los Angeles area of the County of Los Angeles to the east, the City of Vernon to the south and the City of Commerce to the southeast.

As shown in Figure A-1, the project site is located in close proximity to a number of regional transportation corridors. Nearby freeways include the Golden State/Santa Ana Freeway (I-5), the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10), the Pomona Freeway (SR-60), and Santa Ana Freeway (US-101). In addition, major and secondary highways adjacent to the project site include Olympic Boulevard to the south, Soto Street to the west, 8th Street to the north, and Grande Vista

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page A-1 PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT – Work in Progress 5 E 4TH ST S a n G a b r i e l M o u n t a Simi Valley i n s 118 Chatsworth 210 2

MATEO ST

405 Van Woodland Hills Nuys

RIO ST RIO Agoura Hills Encino 101 Glendale 101 Pasadena Santa Monica Mtns. PROJECT Hollywood SITE 1 10 Malibu 405 Santa Monica Los Angeles 5 605

105 EUCLID AVE Q VIOLET ST Manhattan 110 Beach 91 E 7TH ST 1 Carson Redondo Beach Torrance 710 405 San Pedro Long Beach 8TH ST N 60 10 NOT TO SCALE

E 8TH ST 5

S BOYLEAVE

ATLANTIC ST

S SOTO ST GARNET ST

12TH ST

LOS ANGELES RIVER ANGELES LOS GRANDE VISTA AVE E OLYMPIC BLVD

IMPERIAL ST PERRINO PL

PICO BLVD DE LA TORRE WY

UNION PACIFIC AV PAC A LUGO ST E 15TH ST

25TH ST MIRASOL ST MIRASOL

26TH ST E WASHINGTON BLVD

S SANTA FE AV PINE AV PINE

37TH ST Project Site

N Figure A-1 Regional and Project Vicinity Map 0 .25 Miles Scale in approximate miles Source: PCR Services Corporation, 2008 Attachment A - Project Description

to the east. The project site is also well-served by public transit, primarily in the form of bus service provided by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro). In addition, Metro has commenced construction of an extension of the MetroRail Gold Line which would link the Boyle Heights community with Union Station and other MetroRail lines that serve locations throughout the Los Angeles region. The MetroRail Gold Line extension proposes several station stops in Boyle Heights including stops at Soto Street/First Street and Indiana Street/Third Street, each within approximately 1.25 miles of the project site.

Figure A-2 on page A-4 provides an aerial photograph of the project site and immediate site vicinity. As shown in the aerial photograph, surrounding uses include industrial/commercial stores along Soto Street to the west, as well as light industrial uses, commercial uses and the Los Angeles River located further to the west. Uses to the south of the project site along Olympic Boulevard include two schools, a government building, and light industrial and commercial uses. Industrial uses are also located further to the south. Directly east of the project site are multi- family residential buildings operated by the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, referred to as Estrada Courts. Single-family residential uses, with a few small interspersed retail uses are located to the north of the site across 8th Street. In addition, a church is located on the south side of 8th Street.

The project site is currently developed with apartment units and accessory structures located within a property referred to as the Wyvernwood Garden Apartments. The site also includes a 12-unit apartment building that was not part of the original Wyvernwood complex. The project site includes 256 buildings that provide 1,187 dwelling units and ancillary structures for garage, laundry and other related uses. As shown in the aerial photograph provided in Figure A-2, the existing buildings within the site are interspersed with a circuitous internal street and pedestrian network.

The topography of the site is generally flat, with a gradual slope of 65 feet from the northwestern corner to the southeastern edge of the site. Approximately nine acres of the site are comprised of dispersed open space areas that include lawns and mature trees, with the largest open space area located within central portion of the site. An open grassy drainage channel also runs across the more central portion of the site generally in a west to east direction.

The project site is located within the Boyle Heights Community Plan area of the City of Los Angeles. Within the City of Los Angeles, the Community Plans comprise the Land Use Element of the City’s General Plan. The site is designated by the Community Plan Land Use Map for Low Medium II Residential (multi-family residential) uses. In addition, the project site is located within the Eastside State Enterprise Zone, which refers to a State sponsored economic development program implemented by the City’s Community Development Department. The project site is zoned by the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) as RD 1.5-1, which refers to a Restricted Density Multiple Dwelling Zone and Height District 1.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page A-3 PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT – Work in Progress Residential Uses

Industrial

Industrial

Commercial

Residential Uses

LA River School River PROJECT Sears SITE Building

School

Industrial Public Park Light Industrial Uses Residential Uses

South Soto SStreet

treet Industrial Uses

East 24th SStreet treet

East 26th SStreet treet

N Figure A-2 Aerial Map of 0 .25 Miles Surrounding Uses Source: PCR Services Corporation, 2008; Google Earth, 2008.

PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT-Work-in-Progress Attachment A - Project Description

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

The project would redevelop the approximately 68.8 acre project site with a mixed-use community providing increased homeownership opportunities, neighborhood-serving retail and office space, civic space, greens and open space amenities. A breakdown of each of the proposed uses is provided in Table A-1 on page A-6. As indicated therein, the project would include up to 4,400 residential units comprised of no less than 1,200 rental units and up to 3,200 condominium units, and 325,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail and office uses and civic uses. Upon completion of the project, there would be no net loss of rental housing units within the project site, and a considerable increase in ownership housing as compared to current conditions. In addition, the project would include active and passive open space areas throughout the project site, including approximately ten acres of privately maintained, publicly available, common useable open space. In addition, courtyards, plaza and open spaces accessible to project residents would comprise an additional 11 acres of open space amenities. Overall, the project is intended to provide a walkable, family-oriented community with modern amenities and a high-quality design that promotes sustainability. A Conceptual Site Plan for the project is shown in Figure A-3 on page A-7. In addition, a description of the primary components of the project is provided below.

Residential Uses

The project would provide up to 4,400 residential units including no less than 1,200 rental units and up to 3,200 for-sale units. These new residential units would be located within a variety of residential product types with unit sizes ranging from a studio unit to a 3-bedroom plus den/loft unit. It is proposed that 15 percent of all of the residential units on the project site would be affordable to families with very low income. In addition, a senior-housing component would also be provided. The new residential units are anticipated to include modern amenities such as internet access, washers/dryers and air conditioning. As shown in the Conceptual Site Plan provided in Figure A-3, the new residential units would be integrated around landscaped courtyards and an expansive landscaped open space area that would extend across the site from the east to west.

The proposed project would be phased to provide existing residents in good standing the opportunity to relocate to a like unit within the site.

Neighborhood-serving Retail, Office and Civic Uses

The project would include up to 25,000 square feet of civic uses and up to 300,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail and office uses. Of the 300,000 square feet, up to

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page A-5 PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT – Work in Progress Attachment A - Project Description

Table A-1

Project Development

Residential Development Program Type of Unit Number of Units For Sale Up to 3,200 Rental No less than 1,200 Total of All Units 4,400

Proposed Area Land Use Amount Commercial Office/Neighborhood Retail Office 0 - 150,000 sq. ft Medical Office 0 - 25,000 sq.ft.* Neighborhood Retail 0 – 200,000 sq. ft Maximum Aggregate Total 300,000 sq. ft

Civic Uses Total Maximum Space 25,000 sq.ft.

Residential Development Maximum Building Area 5,800,000 sq. ft

* As a component of the 150,000 square feet of maximum office space.

Source: Fifteen Group Land and Development, 2008.

150,000 square feet may be used for office uses (with a maximum of 25,000 square feet of medical office space), while the remaining area would be used for neighborhood-serving retail uses, with a maximum of 200,000 square feet of retail use. The majority of these uses would be located on the lower levels of the new buildings within the southeastern portion of the site. In addition, a stand-alone office building may also be provided within the project site. As shown in the Conceptual Site Plan, the civic uses would be located adjacent to expansive open space areas.

Open Space Areas

The project would include a substantial amount of landscaped open space and recreational areas, doubling the number of on-site trees. Specifically, the project would include a civic plaza, an expansive central park, active parks, neighborhood greens, neighborhood playgrounds and landscaped courtyards and pathways. As shown in the Conceptual Site Plan provided in Figure A-3, these open space and recreational areas would be integrated throughout the site with the most expansive open space element centrally located within the site. These open space areas would include approximately 10 acres of privately maintained, publicly available, common useable open space. The recreational areas would include such amenities

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page A-6 PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT – Work in Progress N Figure A-3 0 300 600 Feet Conceptual Site Plan Scale in approximate feet Source: Fifteen Group Land and Development, 2008

PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT-Work-in-Progress Attachment A - Project Description

as play equipment, athletic courts, seating and open play areas. In addition, approximately 11 acres of semi-private recreational amenities for the project residents would be provided including such features as landscaped courtyards and recreation rooms.

Site Design

As shown in the Conceptual Site Plan provide in Figure A-3, new buildings would be sited around landscaped open space areas that would form a strong organizing feature for the site. Landscaped pedestrian paths creating secure linkages between the mix of uses on-site would be provided throughout the property. Project signage would be designed to establish appropriate identification for the retail uses.

As shown in the Conceptual Site Plan, the project would provide a new street grid that would improve accessibility within the site when compared with the existing circuitous internal street grid. This new street grid would link the various areas of the site, provide for improved access by public safety vehicles and improve connectivity to the surrounding neighborhood and the larger regional roadway network. In addition, the project would provide additional bus stops, which would improve accessibility to existing public transportation services in the project area. The project would also include an enhanced system of pedestrian/bicycle accommodations.

The majority of the new buildings within the project site would range in height from two to seven stories (approximately 24 feet to 75 feet). However, up to three buildings could be as tall as 18 stories (approximately 200 feet) and up to three buildings could be as tall as 24 stories (approximately 260 feet).

Sustainability Features

The mixed-use nature of the project, the project site’s close proximity to the established downtown Los Angeles employment hub, available public transit, and existing available infrastructure are features of the project that demonstrate the principles of smart growth and environmental sustainability. In addition, the project would be designed to include additional Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) features, so as to be capable of achieving certification under the LEED-ND Green Rating System. Such additional LEED features would include energy-efficient buildings, pedestrian and bicycle friendly design, and water conservation features.

Water conservation features include a range of techniques that would further enhance site sustainability. Drought tolerant plants and indigenous species would be utilized. Storm water would be collected and cleansed through a first flush filtration system of rain gardens and urban bioswales, both within the parks themselves and throughout the street network. Permeable

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page A-8 PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT – Work in Progress Attachment A - Project Description

pavement would also be used wherever possible. Storm water filtration planters would collect roof water. Any water features incorporated in the project would utilize recycled water as feasible.

Security Features

The project has been designed to enhance site security by maximizing the instances where eyes on the street may provide natural surveillance of the neighborhood. For example, wherever possible, street facing ground level dwelling units would have front stoops and operable windows. In addition, the ground level retail and office uses would have transparent storefront glazing and sidewalk seating, and balconies and terraces would overlook the greens. At the same time, overall building massing, façade articulations, and landscape elements have been designed to provide clear physical and perceptual delineations between public, semi-public, and private spaces. Greens, streets, and pathways have also been designed to have long sightlines, while buildings have been designed to front the street. In addition, as indicated above, the new streets and pedestrian pathways have been designed to provide multiple routes through and around the property, while offering clear public access and visibility to new neighborhood park spaces.

4. CONSTRUCTION

Construction of the project is expected to occur in five phases commencing in 2011 and ending in 2020. These construction phases may overlap. Construction activities would occur in accordance with LAMC requirements, which prohibit 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. Construction activities associated with the project would result in the excavation of approximately 1,300,500 cubic yards of grading for project development. Of this excavation, approximately 85,300 cubic yards would be used for fill on-site and the remaining 1,215,200 cubic yards would be exported off site.

5. REQUIRED APPROVALS

A series of approvals and permits would be required for the project. Such approvals and permits would include, but are not limited to, the following:

• General Plan Amendment;

• Zone Change Approval;

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page A-9 PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT – Work in Progress Attachment A - Project Description

• Specific Plan;

• Subdivision Map;

• Grading, excavation, and building permits;

• Haul Route Approval, as necessary; and

• Any additional actions as may be deemed necessary.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page A-10 PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT – Work in Progress

ATTACHMENT B EXPLANATION OF CHECKLIST DETERMINATIONS

I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:

a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located within the highly urbanized Boyle Heights community. The project site itself is currently developed with two-story apartment buildings as well as ancillary buildings including laundry buildings and parking garages. In addition, the project site includes lawn areas, mature trees and ornamental landscaping. The site is surrounded by a mix of residential, commercial and industrial uses. No prominent natural features or scenic resources are located within the project site. In addition, no scenic vistas have been designated within the immediate project area.1 Outlying areas present potential view resources in the form of the downtown Los Angeles skyline located to the northwest of the project site and the Santa Monica Mountains to the distant northwest.

The proposed project would result in an increase in building heights and building intensity within the project site, as well as result in the removal of mature trees. Although views of scenic vistas over the project site are limited, it is recommended that further analysis of potential impacts to scenic vistas be included in an environmental impact report (EIR) with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings, or other locally recognized desirable aesthetic natural feature within a city-designated scenic highway?

No Impact. As noted above, the project site is located in an urbanized area. The site includes lawn areas and mature trees but is devoid of other valued natural resources such as rock outcroppings or other locally notable recognized natural features. While existing buildings that are identified as historic and mature trees would be removed to provide for the project, no scenic highways have been identified within the project vicinity by the City and by the State.2 Thus, no

1 City of Los Angeles, General Plan, Boyle Heights Community Plan, adopted November 10, 1998. 2 Ibid. California Department of Transportation, California Scenic Highway Mapping System- Los Angeles County, available online at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/index.htm, website accessed April 21, 2008.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-1

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

potential impacts to a City-designated scenic highway would occur and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?

Potentially Significant Impact. As indicated above, the project site itself is currently developed with two-story apartment buildings as well as ancillary buildings including laundry buildings and parking garages. In addition, the project site includes lawn areas, mature trees and ornamental landscaping. The project would replace the existing aging buildings on site with a new mixed-use community comprised of for-sale and rental residential units, neighborhood- serving retail and office space, civic space and parks and open space amenities. While the proposed project is expected to provide a high-quality design with modern amenities, the project would increase building heights and building intensity within the project site. Therefore, it is recommended that potential impacts associated with alteration of the visual character of the site be further analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project lies within a highly urbanized area, characterized by medium to high ambient nighttime artificial light levels. Traffic on local streets also contributes to overall ambient artificial light levels in the area. The proposed project would require nighttime illumination for architectural highlighting, signage, and security purposes, which may be visible from some nearby off-site vantages. While site lighting would be typical of that associated with urban uses, the project would increase the existing amount of site lighting due to increased density and the addition of neighborhood-serving retail and office uses and civic uses. Therefore, it is recommended that potential impacts associated with light and glare be analyzed further in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

Shading impacts are influenced by the height and bulk of a structure, the time of year, the duration of shading during the day, and the sensitivity of the surrounding uses. The majority of the new buildings on-site would range in height from two to five stories (approximately 24 feet to 75 feet). However, up to three buildings could be as tall as 18 stories (approximately 180 feet) and up to three buildings could be as tall as 24 stories (approximately 260 feet). Thus, shading of off-site areas and some of the light/shade sensitive land uses surrounding the project site during the daytime hours throughout the year as a result of the project could occur. Therefore, it is recommended that this issue be further analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-2

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California agricultural land evaluation and site assessment model (1997) prepared by the California department of conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:

a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

No Impact. The project site has been developed since 1938 and is located within a highly urbanized area. Furthermore, it is not mapped as a Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. No agricultural or other related activities currently occur on- site or within the project vicinity. As such, no impacts to farmland would occur. Further analysis of this issue is not required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

b. Conflict the existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract?

No Impact. The project site is designated as Restricted Density Multiple Dwelling Zone, Height District No.1 (RD 1.5-1). No agricultural zoning is present on-site or within the surrounding area and no lands nearby are enrolled under a Williamson Act Contract. Therefore, no conflicts with existing agricultural zoning or Williamson Act Contracts would occur. Further analysis of this issue is not required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?

No Impact. As previously discussed, the project site is currently fully developed within the highly urbanized community of Boyle Heights. No agricultural uses exist on-site or within the project vicinity nor is the project site or surrounding project vicinity zoned for agricultural uses. Therefore, development of the project would not result in conversion of Farmland to non- agricultural uses. No impacts would occur and further analysis of this issue is not required.

III. AIR QUALITY. The significance criteria established by the south coast air quality management district (SCAQMD) may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project result in:

a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SCAQMD or Congestion Management Plan?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located within the 6,600 square mile South Coast Air Basin (Basin), which is characterized by relatively poor air quality. The South

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-3

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) together with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is responsible for formulating and implementing air pollution control strategies throughout the Basin. The current Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) was adopted June 1, 2007 and outlines the air pollution control measures needed to meet Federal Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) standards by 2015, 24-hr PM2.5 standards by 2020 and Ozone (O3) standards by 2024. The AQMP also proposes policies and measures currently contemplated by responsible agencies to achieve Federal standards for healthful air quality in the Basin that are under SCAQMD jurisdiction. In addition, the current AQMP addresses several Federal planning requirements and incorporates substantial new scientific data, primarily in the form of updated emissions inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological data, and new air qua lity modeling tools.

The proposed project would generate construction emissions, regional stationary sources (e.g., emissions associated with gas and electricity consumption), regional mobile source emissions, and local mobile source emissions. Thus, the project may have the potential to affect implementation of the AQMP and Los Angeles County Congestion Management Plan (CMP). As such, it is recommended that this issue be analyzed further in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?

Potentially Significant Impact. As indicated above, the project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin, which is characterized by relatively poor air quality. State and Federal air quality standards are often exceeded in many parts of the Basin, with Los Angeles County among the highest of the counties that compose the Basin in terms of non-attainment of the standards. The Basin is currently in non-attainment for O3, Particulate Matter (PM10), and PM2.5 based on Federal and State air quality standards. The proposed project would contribute to regional air pollutant emissions during construction and project occupancy. As the project could violate an air quality standard or contribute to an existing air quality standard due to air emissions associated with construction and operation, it is recommended that this issue be analyzed further in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the air basin is non-attainment (ozone, carbon monoxide, & PM10) under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?

Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed above in Response III(a), the project would increase air emissions during construction and operation (e.g., vehicle trips and stationary sources) in a Basin that is currently in non-attainment of Federal and State air quality standards

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-4

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

for O3, PM10, and PM2.5. Therefore, it is recommended that this issue be analyzed further in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

Potentially Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors in the project vicinity consist of the residential uses located to the north and east of the project site, and educational uses to the south of the project site. As the project would increase air emissions during construction and operation, the project could potentially affect nearby sensitive receptors. As such, it is recommended that this issue be further analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?

Less Than Significant Impact. Odors are typically associated with industrial projects involving the use of chemicals, solvents, petroleum products, and other strong-smelling elements used in manufacturing processes. Odors are also associated with such uses as sewage treatment facilities and landfills. As the project involves the development of residential, retail, commercial-office and civic uses with associated parking, no major odor-producing uses that would have the potential to affect a substantial number of people would be introduced. Rather, activities and materials associated with construction would be typical of construction projects. In addition, only limited odors associated with project operations would be generated by on-site waste generation and storage, the use of certain cleaning agents, and/or restaurant uses in the retail areas, all of which would be consistent with existing conditions within the project vicinity. Any odors that may be generated during construction or operation of the project would be localized and temporary in nature, and would not be sufficient to affect a substantial number of people or result in a nuisance as defined by SCAQMD Rule 402. Thus, further analysis of this issue is not required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ?

No Impact. The project site is located within a highly urbanized area that includes residential, commercial and industrial uses. As the site is currently developed with buildings, paving and ornamental landscaping, no habitat modification would occur. Furthermore, no

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-5

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

candidate, sensitive, or special statues species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) are present or have been identified on-site. As such, further analysis of this issue is not required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in the City or regional plans, policies, regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

No Impact. The project site is developed with apartment buildings, as well as ancillary buildings including laundry buildings and parking garages. In addition, the project site includes lawn areas, mature trees and ornamental landscaping. No riparian habitats or sensitive natural communities are located on-site, nor have they been identified in City or regional plans, policies, or regulations of the CDFG or UWSFWS as being within the project site. Thus, no impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive community would occur as a result of implementation of the project. As such, further analysis of this issue is not required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

No Impact. The project site has been developed with residential uses since 1938. There are no federally protected waters or wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, that exist on or in the vicinity of the project site. As such, no adverse impacts to wetlands, marsh vernal pools, or coastal waters would occur as a result of the project. Further analysis of this issue is not required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

Less than Significant Impact. As indicated above, the project site is located in an urbanized area and is developed with buildings, trees and ornamental landscaping. There are no native resident, migratory fish, or wildlife species or established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors on-site or within the project vicinity, nor would the project impede any use of native wildlife nursery sites. Only wildlife commonly found in developed, urban areas are expected to be found within the project site. Modifications within the project site would not significantly impact the survival of such species and would not impact any wildlife movement

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-6

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

corridors in the area. Further analysis of this issue is not necessary and no mitigation measures would be required.

A site survey was performed by PCR Services Corporation to identify birds on the project site. Bird species observed on the project site included American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), rock dove (Columba livia) European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna), and black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans). No raptor species were observed during a site survey. However, the trees on the project site have the potential to be used by a few raptor species for roosting, foraging, or nesting. The project would be required to comply with the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Department of Fish and Game Code Section 3503. In accordance with the MBTA, all tree and vegetation (i.e., large branching shrubs) removal activities would take place outside of the nesting season (February 15th - August 15th). If vegetation removal activities must occur during the nesting season, a biological monitor shall be present during the removal activities to ensure that no active nests will be impacted. If active nests are found, a 200’ buffer radius (500’ for raptors) would be established until the fledglings have left the nest. With compliance with these regulatory requirements, any potential construction impacts on migratory birds would be less than significant, and further analysis is not necessary.

e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance (e.g., oak trees or California walnut woodlands)?

Less Than Significant Impact. A tree survey of the site conducted by PCR biologists resulted in the identification of 696 on-site trees of various species including (Jacaranda (Jacaranda mimosifolia), Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.), Fig (Ficus sp.), Ash (Fraxinus sp.), Southern Magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora), etc.). In addition, 29 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) and 6 California sycamore (Platanus, sp.) trees were observed to be in fair and overall good condition. The project site is located in the City of Los Angeles and therefore, is subject to the Los Angeles Protected Tree Ordinance (Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 46.00; Ordinance No. 153,478). The City’s Protected Tree Ordinance regulates the relocation and removal of all California native oak trees (Quercus sp.), except scrub oak (Quercus dumosa); California sycamore trees (Platanus racemosa); Southern California black walnuts (Juglans californica var. californica); and California bay trees (Umbellularia californica) of four-inches or greater diameter at breast height (DBH). The Ordinance specifically exempts trees that were planted as part of project planting or landscape program. The existing mature trees were planted as part of the development in 1938 and therefore are exempt from the tree ordinance.

It is expected that the number of trees on-site would increase substantially following development of the proposed project. The project would be required to comply with the City’s Street Tree Ordinance, which requires that any removal and/or future planting and alterations in

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-7

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

the future streetscape of the project site be subject to City of Los Angeles Street Tree Policies and street planting requirements.

Based on the above, the project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance. Thus, impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be necessary. However, potential aesthetic impacts associated with tree removal and/or tree placement will be addressed in the Aesthetics Section of the EIR.

f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

No Impact. As indicated above, the project site is not located within an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the provisions of any conservation plans. Further analysis of this issue is not required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in significance of a historical resource as defined in State CEQA §15064.5?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project site includes the Wyvernwood Garden Apartments. The Wyvernwood Garden Apartments were designed by the Los Angeles architecture firm of Witmer and Watson, and developed by John S. Griffith trustee of the estate of Herbert D. Hostetter. The apartments were constructed as early as 1938 with additional buildings constructed over time. In 1997, the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) determined that the site of the Wyvernwood Garden Apartments was eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A in the context of housing in Los Angeles. Thus, the Wyvernwood Garden Apartments are considered to be a potential historic resource. The proposed project would remove the existing apartment buildings within the site. Thus, it is recommended that impacts on potential historic resources be further analyzed and discussed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

b. Cause a substantial adverse change in significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to State CEQA §15064.5?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located within a highly urbanized area, and the entire site has been graded and subject to disruption over the years. Thus, surficial archaeological resources, had they existed at one time, would have likely been previously

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-8

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

disturbed. Notwithstanding, the proposed project would involve excavation at lower depths than occurred for previous development. As the potential exists that archaeological resources may be discovered during excavation and grading of the project site, it is recommended that potential impacts on archaeological resources be further analyzed and discussed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated if necessary.

c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project includes surficial deposits of older Quaternary Alluvium of unknown thickness.

Surface grading or very shallow excavations in the proposed project area are not likely to discover significant vertebrate fossils. Notwithstanding, excavation will occur at depths falling below those of previous site excavation. Therefore, there may be a potential for paleontological resources to be encountered. It is recommended that potential project impacts on paleontological resources be further analyzed and discussed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated if necessary.

d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project site has been fully developed with residential uses since the late 1930s. No known traditional burial sites or other type of cemetery usage has been identified on-site or within the project vicinity. Notwithstanding, as the project would require excavation at depths greater than those previously occurring on the project site, the potential exists for the project to uncover human remains. It is recommended that potential project impacts on the disturbance of human remains be further analyzed and discussed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated if necessary.

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:

a. Exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving:

i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-9

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

Potentially Significant Impact. Fault rupture is defined as the displacement that occurs along the surface of a fault during an earthquake. Based on criteria established by the California Geological Survey (CGS), faults can be classified as active, potentially active, or inactive. Active faults are those having historically produced earthquakes or shown evidence of movement within the past 11,000 years (during the Holocene Epoch).3,4 The seismically active Southern California region is crossed by numerous active and potentially active faults and is underlain by several blind thrust faults (i.e., low angle reverse faults with no surface exposure). As such, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones (formerly Special Study Zones) were established throughout California by CGS. These zones identify areas where potential surface rupture along an active fault could prove hazardous and identify where special studies are required to characterize hazards to habitable structures. In addition, the City of Los Angeles designates Fault Rupture Study Areas extending along each side of active and potentially active faults to establish potentially hazardous areas.

The project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Study Zone or within a Fault Rupture Study Area.5 However, blind thrust faults may be located in the project vicinity. Blind thrust faults can be a significant source of seismic activity. Thus, it is recommended that potential impacts associated with earthquake faults be further analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?

Potentially Significant Impact. As with any development in the Southern California region, the project could be subject to strong ground shaking during a seismic event. The project would result in an increase in the intensity of development within the site. Thus, the project has the potential to result in the increased exposure to people to potential ground shaking impacts. Therefore, it is recommended that this issue be evaluated in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?

Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed above, the project site is located within the seismically active Southern California region. Thus, it is recommended that potential

3 The California Geological Survey was formerly known as the Division of Mines and Geology of the California Department of Conservation. 4 California Department of Conservation, California Geologic Survey. Potentially active faults have demonstrated displacement within the last 1.6 million years (during the Pleistocene Epoch), but do not displace Holocene Strata. Inactive faults do not exhibit displacement younger than 1.6 million years before the present. 5 City of Los Angeles General Plan Safety Element, Exhibit A, adopted by the City Council, November 26, 1996.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-10

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

impacts associated with seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, be addressed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

iv. Landslides?

Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is not designated as a City landslide area, but is a designated hillside grading area.6,7 It is estimated that the elevation on the project site slopes gradually at approximately 65 feet from the northwestern corner of the project site to the southeastern edge of the site. However, this gentle slope would have a low probability of resulting in seismically induced landslides. Furthermore, the project site is not located in a delineated landslide area as indicated by the California Geological Survey. 8 As such, the potential for the project to expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving landslides is low. Further analysis of this issue is not necessary and no mitigation measures would be required.

b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

Potentially Significant Impact. Construction activities associated with the project would have the potential to result in soil erosion during grading and soil stockpiling, subsequent siltation, and conveyance of other pollutants into municipal storm drains. Therefore, it is recommended that this issue be further evaluated in an EIR, with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potential result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is underlain by engineered fill soils comprised of silty to sandy clay and clayey to silty sands, which are yellowish brown to brownish grey, moist, stiff to medium dense, and fine grained with some gravel. The underlying natural soils consist of clayey sands, sands, silty sands, and sandy silts, which are orange brown to yellowish brownish grey, dense to very dense and hard. As discussed above the project site is susceptible to ground shaking. Thus, it is recommended that potential impacts associated with soil stability, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, and collapse be addressed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

6 City of Los Angeles Planning Department, Safety Element of the General Plan, Exhibit B, Areas Susceptible to Liquefaction, October 1993. 7 City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning, Zoning Information and Map Access System, Parcel No. 5170018001, http://www.zimas.lacity.org, accessed February 6, 2008.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-11

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?

Potentially Significant Impact. Expansive soils are typically associated with fine- grained clayey soils that have the potential to shrink and swell with repeated cycles of wetting and drying. As discussed above, the project site is underlain by engineered fill soils comprised of silty to sandy clay and clayey to silty sands, which are yellowish brown to brownish grey, moist, stiff to medium dense, and fine grained with some gravel. The underlying natural soils consist of clayey sands, sands, silty sands, and sandy silts, which are orange brown to yellowish brownish grey, dense to very dense and hard. Thus it is recommended that further analysis of expansive soils be addressed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?

No Impact. The project would be served by and would improve the existing sewer infrastructure on-site. Thus, the project would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impacts would occur and further analysis of this issue is not required.

VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:

a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

Less Than Significant Impact. The type and amount of hazardous materials to be used for the project would be typical of those used for residential and commercial developments. Specifically, operation of the commercial uses would be expected to involve the use and storage of small quantities of potentially hazardous materials in the form of cleaning solvents, painting supplies, pesticides for landscaping, and petroleum products. The proposed residential uses would involve the limited use of household cleaning solvents and pesticides for landscaping. Construction of the project would also involve the use of potentially hazardous materials, including vehicle fuels, oils, and transmission fluids. However, all potentially hazardous materials would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with manufacturers’ instructions and handled in compliance with applicable standards and regulations. Any associated risk would be adequately reduced to a less than significant level through compliance with these standards

8 California Geological Survey, Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42, Seismic Hazards Zone Map- Los Angeles Quadrangle, Released March 25, 1999.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-12

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

and regulations. As such, construction and operation of the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Further analysis of this issue is not required, and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?

c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?

d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project site has been developed with residential uses since the late 1930s. Based on this use, it is not expected that demolition and excavation activities would result in a significant hazard to the public. Nonetheless, given that industrial uses are located in the project vicinity and educational facilities are located adjacent to the project site, it is recommended that a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I) be prepared to formally document any potential hazards within the project site and surrounding area. As part of the Phase I, lists of hazardous materials sites would be reviewed to assist in identifying any potential hazards within the vicinity of the site. The Phase I and any other associated reports will then be used to address potential hazards within the EIR, with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

No Impact. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan area or within two miles of an airport. In addition, the project site is not located within an airport hazard area as designated by the City of Los Angeles. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a significant safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. As such, further analysis of this issue is not required, and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-13

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the area?

No Impact. There are no private airstrips in the vicinity of the project site, and the site is not located within a designated airport hazard area. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in airport-related safety hazards for the people residing or working in the area. Further analysis of this issue is not required, and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

Potentially Significant Impact. While it is expected that the majority of construction activities for the project would be confined on-site, short-term construction activities may temporarily affect access on portions of the adjacent street rights-of-way during periods of the day. In addition, the project would generate traffic in the project vicinity and would result in some modifications to access from the streets that surround the site. Thus, it is recommended that potential interference with emergency access be further analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?

No Impact. The project site is located in the heavily urbanized community of Boyle Heights and is not near any wildlands. Furthermore, the project site is not a designated wildfire hazard area by the City. 9 Therefore, the project would not subject people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death as a result of exposure to wildland fires. No further analysis of this issue is required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project result in:

a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?

Potentially Significant Impact. Construction of the project would require earthwork activities, including excavation and grading of the site. During precipitation events in particular, construction activities associated with the project would have the potential to result in soil

9 City of Los Angeles Planning Department, Safety Element of the General Plan, Exhibit D, Selected Wildfire Hazard Areas, April 1996.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-14

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

erosion during grading and soil stockpiling, subsequent siltation, and conveyance of other pollutants into municipal storm drains. In addition, new uses would be introduced to the site. Therefore, the potential impacts to water quality and discharge requirements should be evaluated further in an EIR, with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned land uses for which permits have been granted)?

Potentially Significant Impact. Historic high groundwater levels beneath the site on the order of 150 feet bgs have been recorded by the CDMG. Excavation during project construction is expected to reach to 50 feet bgs. Thus, dewatering to lower the groundwater is not expected to be required by the project. However, the project may result in an increase in impervious surfaces within the project site. Thus, it is recommended that potential impacts to groundwater recharge be further analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?

Potentially Significant Impact. The majority of the project site is fully developed with buildings, paved areas, and ornamental landscaping. No streams are located within the project vicinity. However, the Los Angeles River is located approximately 0.3 miles west of the project site. The existing drainage pattern of this river has been altered significantly over the years and would not be expected to be altered by the project.

The proposed project would result in redevelopment of the site with new residential uses, neighborhood-serving retail and office uses, civic uses, and new landscaped open space areas. Thus, the project would result in modifications to the drainage system within the site and a potential increase in the amount of impervious surface area on the project site. Such modifications could potentially affect drainage patterns which could result in erosion. Therefore, it is recommended that this issue be addressed further in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-15

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off site?

Potentially Significant Impact. As noted above, the project may result in an increase in impervious surfaces as well as modifications to the drainage system within the project site. Therefore, it is recommended that an analysis of alterations to drainage patterns and the associated potential for flooding be addressed further in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?

Potentially Significant Impact. As noted above, the project would result in the modification of the existing drainage system within the project site as well as a potential increase in impervious surfaces. Therefore, it is recommended that the potential for the project to exceed the capacity of drainage systems or to result in additional sources of polluted runoff be addressed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?

Potentially Significant Impact. As previously indicated in Response No. VI(a), above, exposed soils during construction of the project could potentially be transported via stormwater runoff into storm drains. In addition, the project would introduce new uses to the project site. Therefore, it is recommended that the potential for the project to degrade water quality be analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

g. Place housing within a 100-year flood plain as mapped on federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?

No Impact. The project site is not located within a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) or City of Los Angeles designated 100-year flood plain.10 Therefore, the project would not place housing within a 100-year flood plain as mapped by federal flood hazard boundaries, FIRM maps, and other flood hazard delineation

10 City of Los Angeles Planning Department, Safety Element of the General Plan, Exhibit F, 100-Year and 500-Year Flood Plains, March 1994.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-16

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

maps. Further analysis of this issue is not required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

h. Place within a 100-year flood plain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?

No Impact. As stated above, the project site is not located within a FEMA or City of Los Angeles designated 100-year flood plain. The site is within an area of minimal flooding potential according to the Federal Insurance Administration. Therefore, the project would not place structures within a 100-year flood plain which would impede or redirect flood flows. No impacts would occur and further analysis of this issue is not required.

i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?

No Impact. As stated above, the project site is not located within a FEMA or City of Los Angeles designated 100-year flood plain. Additionally, according to the Safety Element of the City of Los Angeles General Plan, the project area is not mapped as a potential inundation area that may result from failure of a levee or dam. 11 Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding. Further analysis of this issue is not necessary and no mitigation measures would be required.

j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?

No Impact. A seiche is an oscillation of a body of water in an enclosed or semi-enclosed basin, such as a reservoir, harbor, lake, or storage tank. A tsunami is a great sea wave, commonly referred to as a tidal wave, produced by a significant undersea disturbance such as tectonic displacement of a sea floor associated with large, shallow earthquakes. Mudflows result from the downslope movement of soil and/or rock under the influence of gravity.

The project site is relatively distant from the ocean; is not in the vicinity of a reservoir, harbor, lake, or storage tank capable of creating a seiche; and is not positioned downslope from an area of potential mudflow. Additionally, the project site is not mapped as a potential inundation or tsunami hazard area by the City of Los Angeles. 12 Therefore, no impacts would occur as a result of inundation by a seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Further analysis of this issue is not required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

11 City of Los Angeles Planning Department, Safety Element of the General Plan, Exhibit G Inundation & Tsunami Hazard Areas, March 1994. 12 Ibid.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-17

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:

a. Physically divide an established community?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located in the Boyle Heights community of the City of Los Angeles. The project site is located within a highly urbanized area with nearby major regional transportation (freeway and public transit) corridors. Surrounding uses to the west include industrial/commercial stores that align Soto Street, with light industrial uses and the Los Angeles River further west. Uses to the south include commercial, government, educational, light industrial and manufacturing uses. Uses directly east of the project site include multi-family residential units located along Grande Vista Street. Uses to the north include single family residences, with some interspersed retail uses and a church located along 8th Street.

The proposed project would replace existing residential uses with new residential uses, neighborhood-serving retail and office uses, and civic uses. Also, the project would increase the density of the project site and the types of uses within the project site, further affecting the land use relationships. Thus, it is recommended that this issue be addressed further in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located within the Boyle Heights Community Plan area of the City of Los Angeles and is subject to the land use policies indicated therein. In addition, the site is designated by the Community Plan Land Use Map for Low Medium II Residential (multi-family residential) uses. The project site is zoned by the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) as RD 1.5-1, which refers to a Restricted Density Multiple Dwelling Zone and Height District 1. In addition, the project is subject to consideration under regional plans including SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG), MTA’s CMP, and the SCAQMD’s AQMP.

Project implementation would require several discretionary approvals including a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change Approval, Specific Plan, Subdivision Map, as well as other review and permitting actions. Therefore, it is recommended that the project’s relationship to applicable land use plans, policies and regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect for both the local/City of Los Angeles and Regional jurisdictions be evaluated further in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-18

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?

No Impact. The project site is located within the heavily urbanized community of Boyle Heights. No habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans apply to the project site or project area. As such, the project would not conflict with any habitat conservation plans. Therefore, further analysis of this issue is not necessary, and no mitigation measures are required.

X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?

b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?

No Impact. The project site is not classified by the City of Los Angeles as an area containing significant mineral deposits, nor is the site designated as an existing mineral resource extraction area by the State of California.13 In addition, the project site’s designated land use, i.e., Low Medium II Residential (multi-family residential) as defined by the Boyle Heights Community Plan, is not designated as a mineral extraction land use. Therefore, the chances of uncovering mineral resources during construction and grading would be minimal. Thus, project implementation would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region and residents of the State, nor of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. No impacts to mineral resources would occur. Further analysis of this issue is not necessary, and no mitigation measures would be required.

XI. NOISE. Would the project:

a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise in level in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

Potentially Significant Impact. Noise sources generated in the project vicinity consist primarily of traffic noise along nearby roadways such as Soto Street, 8th Street, Olympic Boulevard, and Grande Vista Avenue. The project site lies adjacent to surrounding uses that

13 U.S. Geologic Survey, Minerals Yearbook: The Mineral Industry of California, 2004.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-19

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

would be sensitive to noise impacts including residential development to the east and north and two schools south of the project site.

During construction, the use of heavy equipment (e.g., bulldozers, backhoes, cranes, loaders, etc.) would generate noise on a short-term basis. In addition, operation of the project may increase existing noise levels as a result of the additional residents that would reside on-site, the commercial uses proposed on-site, project-related traffic, and HVAC systems. Therefore, it is recommended that the project’s potential to exceed noise standards established in applicable regulations be analyzed further in an EIR with feasible mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

b. Exposure of people to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

Potentially Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed project may generate groundborne noise and vibration due to site grading, clearing activities, and haul truck travel. Thus, the project would have the potential to expose people to or generate excessive groundborne vibration and noise levels during short-term construction activities. Therefore, it is recommended that this issue be analyzed further in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated as necessary.

The project’s proposed commercial and residential uses would not generate groundborne noise or vibration at levels beyond those that currently exist. As such, operation of the project would not expose people to excessive groundborne vibration or noise. Therefore, no further analysis of operational groundborne vibration or groundborne noise is required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed above, project operations would contribute to a permanent increase in ambient noise levels due to on-site activities (e.g., additional residents that would reside on-site, the commercial uses proposed on-site, project- related traffic, and HVAC systems). Additionally, development of the proposed project would likely result in an increase in traffic along adjacent roadways. This project-generated traffic would result in an increase in roadway noise, and thus may potentially result in a permanent increase ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. Such increases in noise levels could potentially affect sensitive receptors including nearby residential and educational uses. Therefore, it is recommended that impacts associated with a permanent increase in ambient noise levels be analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-20

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed above, construction-related activities and equipment used during the project’s construction phase could result in a temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels above existing levels. Additionally, operation of the project could increase ambient noise levels in the project area as a result of increases in project- generated traffic and on-site activities. Such increases in noise levels could potentially affect sensitive receptors including nearby residential and educational uses. Therefore, it is recommended that impacts associated with a temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels be analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

No Impact. As indicated above, the project site is not located within an airport land use plan area or within two miles of an airport. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. As such, further analysis of this issue is not required, and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

No Impact. As previously indicated, there are no private airstrips located within the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Further analysis of this issue is not required, and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:

a. Induce substantial population growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?

Potentially Significant Impact. The City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning, Demographic Research Unit estimated the Boyle Heights 2006 population at 92,483 people with

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-21

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

23,224 housing units. The Boyle Heights Community Plan projects an estimated 2010 population of 122,092 with 29,266 housing units and 34,683 employees. The project would result in an increase of 3,213 housing units within the Boyle Heights Community, as well as 325,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail and office space and civic space. These uses would generate direct and indirect growth in population and employment. Therefore, it is recommended that consistency of this project-related growth relative to projected growth set forth in adopted plans be addressed in an EIR.

b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (See below.)

c. Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project would result in the removal of 1,187 rental units. However, upon completion of the project at least 1,200 rental units would be provided on- site together with up to 3,200 for-sale units. In addition, the proposed project would be phased to provide existing residents in good standing the opportunity to relocate to a like unit within the site. Nonetheless, given the importance of this issue, it is recommended that this issue be discussed further in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

a. Fire protection?

Potentially Significant Impact. The Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) provides fire protection and emergency medical services within the project site and surrounding area. The two closest fire stations to the project site are Fire Station No. 25 at 2927 Whittier Boulevard located approximately 0.50 miles northeast of the project site, and Fire Station No. 2 at 1962 East Cesar Chavez Avenue located approximately 1.7 miles north of the project site. The project would increase the amount of floor area within the site, introduce new residents to the project site, and increase the number of patrons, visitors and employees within the site, thus creating a greater demand for LAFD services. As such, it is recommended that potential impacts associated with fire protection be analyzed further in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-22

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

b. Police protection?

Potentially Significant Impact. Police protection services for the project site are provided by the West Bureau of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). The closest police station to the site is the Hollenbeck Community Police Station located at 1936 East 1st Street, approximately 1.42 miles to the northwest. The service area of this police station encompasses the Pasadena Freeway (I-710) and the Los Angeles City boundary to the north, the City boundary to the south, the Los Angeles River and the Pasadena Freeway (I-710) to the west, and the City boundary to the east. The project would increase the residential and daytime population within the site, thus creating a greater demand for LAPD services. As such, it is recommended that potential impacts associated with police protection services be analyzed in the EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

c. Schools?

Potentially Significant Impact. The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) provides public education to children in grades K-12 within the project area. The project site is specifically located in LAUSD District 2. Implementation of the project would introduce up to 4,400 new residential units, an increase of 3,213 units over existing 1,187 units, and would therefore generate an increase in student enrollment within the nearby school system. These students would increase the need for additional school services and facilities. As such, it is recommended that potential impacts on existing schools be analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

d. Parks?

Potentially Significant Impact. The Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks (LADRP) is responsible for the provision, maintenance, and operation of public recreational facilities and services in the City of Los Angeles. The project site is located in the Metro Region of LADRP’s jurisdiction. The closest park facility to the project site is Hostetter Playground located to the southeast of the project site. Other LADRP public recreational facilities within a two-mile radius (within walking distance) of the site include Boyle Heights Sports Center Park, Ramon Garcia Recreation Center, Hollenbeck Park, Evergreen Recreation Center, Vest Pocket Park, Salazar Park, and the Costello Recreation Center.

The project would include a substantial amount of landscaped open space and recreational areas. Specifically, the project would include a civic plaza, an expansive central park, active parks, neighborhood greens, neighborhood playgrounds and landscaped courtyards and pathways. These open space and recreational areas would be integrated throughout the site with the most expansive open space element centrally located within the site. These open space

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-23

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination areas would include approximately 10 acres of privately maintained, publicly available, common useable open space and parks. The recreational areas would include such amenities as play equipment, athletic courts, and seating and open play areas. In addition, private recreational amenities for the residential uses would include an additional approximately 11 acres of semi- private landscaped courtyards and recreation areas. These on-site facilities would provide a substantial amount of open space and recreational amenities for project residents and the community. Notwithstanding, it is recommended that potential impacts on existing parks be further analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

e. Other governmental services (including roads)?

Potentially Significant Impact. The Los Angeles Public Library (LAPL) provides library services to the City of Los Angeles. Project-generated residents would contribute to the demand for nearby LAPL library facilities, including the Robert Louis Stevens Branch Library, the Benjamin Franklin Branch Library, and the Malabar Branch Library. Therefore, it is recommended that potential impacts on library facilities be further analyzed in an EIR.

During development and operation of the project, other governmental services, including roads, would continue to be utilized. Project residents, visitors, and employees would use the existing surrounding road network and the reconfigured roadway network provided within the project site, in a manner similar to the current use of the public roadways within the project area. As discussed below in Section XV (Transportation/Circulation), the project could result in an increase in the number of vehicle trips attributable to the project site. However, the additional use of roadways would not be excessive and would not necessitate the upkeep of such facilities beyond normal requirements. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on other governmental services. Further analysis of other governmental services is not necessary, and no mitigation measures would be required.

XIV. RECREATION.

a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed in Response XIII(d) (Public Services), the project would provide a considerable amount of recreation facilities. However, the project would increase the residential and daytime population within the site. As such, the project could increase the use of recreational facilities such that physical deterioration of the facilities could

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-24

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

occur or be accelerated. Therefore, it is recommended that this issue be further analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Potentially Significant Impact. As indicated above, the project would include a substantial amount of landscaped open space and recreational areas. The construction of these facilities may have a significant impact on the environment. Therefore, it is recommended that the physical impacts to the environment associated with the construction or expansion of recreational facilities be addressed for all of the topics included in the EIR.

XV. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project:

a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to ratio capacity on roads, or congestion at intersections)?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project would redevelop the project site with a mix of 4,400 residential units, 300,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail and office space, and 25,000 square feet of civic space. Thus the project would generate new vehicle trips within the surrounding street system. In addition, construction of the project would also result in a temporary increase in traffic due to construction-related truck trips and worker vehicle trips. Thus, traffic increases associated with construction and operation of the project could adversely affect the existing capacity of the street system or exceed an established level of service (LOS) standard. It is recommended that this issue be further analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?

Potentially Significant Impact. The Congestion Management Program (CMP) is a state-mandated program enacted by the State legislature to address the impacts that urban congestion has on local communities and the region as a whole. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) is the local agency responsible for implementing the requirements of the CMP. New projects located in the City of Los Angeles must comply with the requirements set forth in the CMP. These requirements include the provision that that all

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-25

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

freeway segments where a project could add 150 or more trips in each direction during the peak hours be evaluated. The guidelines also require evaluation of all designated CMP roadway intersections where a project could add 50 or more trips during either peak hour. As a result of the proposed new uses, the project would generate additional vehicle trips, which could potentially add 150 or more trips to a freeway segment or 50 trips to a CMP roadway intersection. Thus, it is recommended that further analysis of this issue be included in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?

No Impact. The project site is not located within the vicinity of a public or private airport. The project does not propose any uses that would increase the frequency of air traffic. The project would also include the development of buildings up to 24-stories in height, i.e., taller than 200 feet. Therefore, the project would be required to comply with applicable Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements regarding rooftop lighting for high rises. Furthermore, in accordance with FAA requirements, Form 7460-1, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration, would be filed with the FAA prior to construction of buildings that are 200 feet or greater in height from the grading terrain. As such, no significant impacts to air traffic patterns are anticipated. Further analysis of this issue is not required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

d. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

No Impact. The project does not include any hazardous design features such as sharp curves or dangerous intersections on- or off-site, nor does the project propose any hazardous or incompatible uses. Furthermore, there are no existing hazardous design features such as sharp curves or dangerous intersections on-site or within the project vicinity. No impacts would occur. Further analysis of this issue is not necessary, and no mitigation measures would be required.

e. Result in inadequate emergency access?

Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed above, immediate access to the project vicinity is provided via 8th Street to the north, Grande Vista to the east, Olympic Boulevard to the south and Soto Street to the west. Soto Street and Washington Boulevard are nearby designated disaster routes in the Safety Element of the City of Los Angeles General Plan Framework.14

14 City of Los Angeles Planning Department, Safety Element of the General Plan, Exhibit H, Critical Facilities and Lifeline System, April 1995.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-26

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

While it is expected that the majority of construction activities for the project would be confined on-site, short-term construction activities may temporarily affect access on portions of the adjacent street rights-of-way during periods of the day. In addition, the project would generate increased traffic in the project vicinity and would result in some modifications to access from the streets that surround the site. Thus, it is recommended that potential effects on emergency access be further analyzed in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

f. Result in inadequate parking capacity?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project proposes to provide parking for all of the project uses at a rate that would be determined through demand based parking requirement formulas that would be specified in the project’s specific plan. Determination of parking demand and appropriate project implementation of parking requirements (e.g. the identification of demand formulas) requires further analysis and presentation in an EIR to demonstrate that project demand for parking would be met. Therefore, it is recommended that this issue be further analyzed in an EIR with feasible mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located in an area well served by public transportation. Several transit providers operate transit service within the outer boundaries of the project site, including Metro and the Los Angeles Department of Transportation. Operation of the proposed project would not physically conflict with transit service in the area. Instead, the project would support the use of alternative transportation as it would locate residential and commercial uses within proximity to public transportation services. During project construction, infrastructure improvements on street rights-of-way may require the temporary relocation of bus stops. The bus stops would be expected to be relocated within a quarter mile of their existing locations, which is not anticipated to result in a significant impact on transit service. Additionally, the project would support and promote a more pedestrian- oriented community. However, in recognition of the importance of this land use planning issue to the City, it is recommended that the project’s consistency with policies, plans, and programs supporting alternative transportation be analyzed further in an EIR.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-27

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

XVI. UTILITIES. Would the project:

a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?

Potentially Significant Impact. Wastewater services to the project site are currently provided by the Los Angeles Department of Public Works (LADPW). The proposed project would redevelop the project site with new residential uses, neighborhood-serving retail and office uses, and civic uses, resulting in additional sources of wastewater generation. The incremental quantity of wastewater generated by the proposed project could potentially result in impacts regarding wastewater treatment. As such, it is recommended that this issue be analyzed further in an EIR with feasible mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project would redevelop the project site with new residential uses, neighborhood-serving retail and office uses, and civic uses, which would result in an increase in the water demand wastewater generated on-site. Consequently, this net increase may require upgrades to existing facilities. Therefore, it is recommended that this issue be analyzed further in an EIR with feasible mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

Potentially Significant Impact. The majority of the project site is developed with buildings and paved surfaces. However, as discussed above, development of the project could increase the amount of surface runoff on-site. Furthermore, proposed development could result in a change in on-site drainage patterns, thus affecting runoff flows into the local drainage system. Therefore, it is recommended that the potential for the project to require new drainage facilities or the expansion of existing facilities be evaluated further in an EIR with feasible mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resource, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?

Potentially Significant Impact. Water service is provided to the project site by the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP). The proposed project would result

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-28

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

in increased water demand generated by new residences and neighborhood-serving retail and office uses, and civic uses. Senate Bill (SB) 610, effective January 1, 2002 and codified in California Water Code Section 10910 et seq., requires that a water supply assessment be provided for certain projects subject to CEQA.15 The project would be subject to this Water Code requirement since, the project would generate a demand for water that would be greater than the amount of water required by a 500 dwelling unit project.16 A water supply assessment will be conducted to determine if public water sources can provide sufficient water supplies during normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years during a 20-year timeframe. As such, the availability of water is recommended for further evaluation in an EIR.

e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project would be served by the City of Los Angeles wastewater treatment system. As discussed in Response No. XVI(a), the project would increase the amount of wastewater generated by the project site, resulting in an increase in the amount of wastewater currently treated by the HTP. As such, it is recommend that the project’s potential impacts on the City’s wastewater treatment services be further analyzed to identify project impacts on treatment capacity and distribution capacity, with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?

Potentially Significant Impact. Various public agencies and private companies provide solid waste management services in the City of Los Angeles. Private collectors service most multi-family units and commercial developments, whereas the City’s Bureau of Sanitation collects the majority of residential waste from single-family and some smaller multi-family residences. Construction of the project would generate construction and demolition (C&D) debris (e.g., asphalt, glass, concrete, steel, wood), which would be transported and disposed of at one of the several unclassified (inert) landfills in Los Angeles County. In addition, during project operation, the project’s new residential uses, neighborhood-serving retail and office uses and civic uses would generate additional solid waste, which would increase the amount of solid waste currently disposed of at Los Angeles County Class III landfills. As such, further analysis of this issue is recommended in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

15 Codified in the California Water Code Section 10910 et seq. 16 California Water Code Section 10912 details the criteria for determining which projects are subject to SB 610.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-29

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

Potentially Significant Impact. The project would comply with applicable regulations related to solid waste, including those pertaining to waste reduction and recycling. Specifically, the project would comply with the City’s Space Allocation Ordinance (No. 171687), which requires that all new development projects provide an adequate recycling area or room for collecting and loading recyclable materials. Furthermore, the project would provide on-site recycling collection facilities for retail patrons, employees, and residents.17 The project would also promote compliance with the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939) through source reduction and recycling programs. Nonetheless, as the project would result in increased solid waste generated on-site, it is recommended that the project’s compliance with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste be further evaluated in an EIR with mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

h. Other Utilities and Service Systems

Less Than Significant Impact. Electricity transmission to the project site is provided and maintained by LADWP. Future plans regarding the provision of electrical services are presented in the LADWP 2007 Integrated Resources Plan. The Plan identifies future demand for services and provides a framework for how LADWP plans on continuing to meet future consumer demand. The LADWP is required to meet operational, planning reserve and reliability criteria, and the resource adequacy standards of the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC). These standards define the system reserve margin requirements and other criteria for which LADWP must plan and operate. As described in the plan, the LADWP is projected to have a supply of 7,721 megawatts (MW) to meet a peak demand of 6,876 MW in 2020. As such, LADWP would have a reserve capacity of 845 MW to meet peak demands. In total, LADWP forecasts an energy demand of 28,120 GWh in 2020.

Electricity demand for the proposed project was calculated assuming a project scenario which includes 200,000 square feet of retail uses, and 100,000 square feet of commercial office uses, inclusive of 25,000 square feet of medical office uses in addition to the project’s residential and civic uses. This approach provides a conservative estimate, since it is based on the maximum amount of retail space that could be developed on-site, forecasting a higher electrical demand as the generation rate for retail uses is higher than for office uses. A project scenario with greater commercial- office development in-lieu of retail development would consume less electricity. As shown in Table B-1 on page B-31 below, the project would consume

17 Ordinance No. 171687 adopted by the Los Angeles City Council on August 6, 1997.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-30

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

Table B-1

Electricity Demand

Generation # of Area Rate a Units Total Total Land Uses Units (sq.ft.) (kWh) (per year) (kWh/yr) (MWh/yr)

Existing Residential 1,187 5,626.50 d.u. 6,678,656 6,678 Existing Uses Total 6,678,656 6,678 Proposed b Residential Apartments 1,200 5626.5 d.u. 6,751,800 6,752 Condominiums 3,200 5626.5 d.u. 18,004,800 18,005 Neighborhood Retail 200,000 13.55 sq.ft. 2,710,000 2,710 Commercial Office 75,000 12.95 sq.ft. 971,250 971 Medical Office 25,000 12.95 sq.ft. 323,750 324 Civic c 25,000 10.5 sq ft 262,500 263 Proposed Uses Total 325,000 29,024,100 29,024

Net Increase 22,345,445 22,346 a Electricity consumption factors based on Table A9-11-A of SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (April 1993). b The scenario presented in this table is based on the maximum amount of retail that could be developed by the project providing a more conservative analysis as the generation rate for retail uses is higher than the rate for office uses. c Generation Rates for miscellaneous uses were utilized as no generation rates were available for civic uses.

Source: PCR Services Corporation, 2008.

approximately 29,024,100 kilowatt hours per year (kWh/yr) or approximately 29,024 megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity per year. This projected demand represents a net increase of 22,346 MWh of electricity per year over existing conditions on-site. When compared with LADWP’s projected energy demand of 28,120 GWh for 2020, the project would represent 0.08 percent of the projected annual demand. As this increase in demand would be negligible in comparison to the projected electrical demand of the LADWP and consistent with planned ability to serve, the project would have a less than significant impact on electrical services and would not exceed LADWP’s planned capacity. On site infrastructure needed to supply the site, e.g. transformers for individual buildings, would be provided pursuant to LADWP requirements, as project components.

Natural gas is provided to the project site by the Southern California Gas Company (SCGC). Planning for the provision of natural gas occurs through the 2007 Integrated Energy Policy Report, and the 2007 Final Natural Gas Market Assessment which supports the development of that plan. Planning is performed for a 10 year horizon year. As indicated therein, during the 2007-2017 forecast periods, all major pipeline systems serving California,

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-31

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

except the Kern River pipeline, would operate at usage rates between 60 and 70 percent. Although the consumption estimates reflect usage through 2017, the current plan incorporates findings of the CEC’s Outlook for Trade in Liquefied Natural Gas Projections to the Year 2020. That plan projects that in 2020 the State will be able to meet three projected levels of trade in liquefied natural gas, inclusive of a base case estimate, as well as a scenario that reflects a more optimistic view of supply, and a scenario that reflects concerns for geopolitical constraints on supply. Thus, SCGC has sufficient capacity for its service area.

Based on the California Energy Commission 2007 Natural Gas Market Assessment, the SCGC is projected to have a supply of 2,399 million cubic feet per day (MMcfd) or 875.6 billion cubic feet per year (Bcfy) of natural gas supply in 2017 and a demand for use of 2,351 MMcfd or 858.1 Bcfy.18 As with the electricity calculations presented above, natural gas demand for the project was calculated by utilizing the more conservative scenario with 200,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail, and 100,000 square feet of commercial office uses inclusive of 25,000 square feet of medical office uses in addition to the project’s residential and civic uses. As shown in Table B-2 on page B-33, the project is anticipated to consume approximately 18,481 thousand cubic feet (kcf) of natural gas per month. This is a net increase of approximately 13,719 kcf per month of natural gas demand over existing conditions. The projected level of natural gas consumption equates to a net increase in demand of approximately 0.16 Bcfy. Relative to a projected annual supply of 875.6 Bcfy within the entire SCGC service area in 2017, the annual consumption of natural gas associated with the proposed project would represent 0.02 percent of the projected supplies.19 This would be a negligible amount of the expected demand projected and planned capacity of the SCGC. Thus, impacts regarding natural gas services would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be necessary. On site infrastructure needed to supply the site would be provided pursuant to requirements of the SCGC as project components.

The electricity and natural gas demand estimates presented above for the project are based on consumption factors presented in the 1993 SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, which do not take into account the energy conservation measures that would be incorporated into the project. Therefore, the actual electricity and natural gas demands of the project are anticipated to be less than estimated. Furthermore, utility providers are required to plan for necessary upgrades and expansions to their systems to ensure that adequate service will be provided. Further analysis of this issue is not required and no mitigation measures would be necessary.

18 California Energy Commission, California Energy Demand 2008-2018 Staff Revised Forecast, Staff Final Report, November 2007. CEC-200-2007-015-SF2. 19 Information on the SCGC’s projected supply and demand for 2020 is not yet available. Therefore, the project’s consumption was analyzed relative to the forecasted supply for 2017, the most recent information available for SCGC’s forecasts. Based on a review of the SCGC’s 2007 Natural Gas Market Assessment, both the forecasted supply and demand for the year 2017 will be less than that of 2007.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-32

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

Table B-2

Natural Gas Demand

Generation Units # of Area Ratea (cf/per Total Total Land Uses Units (sq.ft.) (cf) month) (cf/month) (Bcfy)

Existing Residential 1,187 4011.5 d.u. 4,761,651 0.06 Existing Uses Total 4,761,651 0.06 Proposed b Residential Apartments 1,200 4011.5 d.u. 4,813,800 0.06 Condominiums 3,200 4011.5 d.u. 12,836,800 0.15 Neighborhood Retail 200,000 2.9 sq. ft. 580,000 0.01 Commercial Office 75,000 2.0 sq. ft. 150,000 0.00 Medical Office 25,000 2.0 sq. ft. 50,000 0.00 Civic c 25,000 2.0 sq ft 50,000 0.00 Proposed Uses Total 325,000 18,480,600 0.22

Net Increase 13,718,950 0.16 a Natural gas factors based on Table A9-12-A of SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (April 1993). b The scenario presented in this table is based on the maximum amount of retail that could be developed by the project providing a more conservative analysis as the generation rate for retail uses is higher than the rate for office uses. c Generation rates for office uses were utilized as no generation rates were available for civic uses.

Source: PCR Services Corporation, 2008.

XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.

a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed in Responses IV(a) through IV(f) above, the project site is located within the highly urbanized community of Boyle Heights. No fish or wildlife species are located on-site. Furthermore, there are no plant or animal communities, rare or endangered plant or animals located on-site or within the project vicinity. As such, the project would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment by substantially reducing

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-33

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

the habitat or population of fish or wildlife, nor threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community or reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal species. Impacts to fish or wildlife species, plant or animal communities, or rare or endangered plants or animals would not occur and further analysis of this issue is not required.

However, as discussed in Response V(a), project site includes the Wyvernwood Garden Apartments, which includes buildings that were constructed as early as 1938. In 1997, the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) determined that the site was eligible for listing in the National Register of historic places as it was “associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.” As the project would redevelop the existing site, requiring the removal of the Wyvernwood Garden Apartments, the project could potentially eliminate an important example of the major periods of California history or prehistory. As such, further analysis of this issue is recommended in an EIR with feasible mitigation measures incorporated, if necessary.

b. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects).

Potentially Significant Impact. The potential for cumulative impacts occurs when the independent impacts of the project are combined with the impacts of related projects in proximity to the project site such that impacts occur that are greater than the impacts of the project alone. The project vicinity includes current and/or probable future projects whose development would contribute to potentially significant cumulative impacts in conjunction with the proposed project. Sections I through XVI above identify numerous environmental topics whose impacts should be evaluated in an EIR. In all of those cases, the cumulative effects of the project together with other anticipated development project should also be analyzed in an EIR.

The environmental topics which were determined above not to potentially result in significant impacts due to the project, would also not be expected to result in cumulative impacts. Specifically, with regard to cumulative effects for the issues of agricultural, biological, and mineral resources, the project site is located in an urbanized area and therefore, other development projects occurring in the project area would also largely occur on previously disturbed land and would not be anticipated to have an impact associated with these issue areas. Thus, no cumulative impact to these resources would occur.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-34

Attachment B – Explanation of Checklist Determination

c. Does the project have environmental effects which cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Potentially Significant Impact. Construction and operation of the proposed project could result in environmental effects that could have substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Such potential impacts were identified in discussion above which identifies potentially significant impacts. The proposed project has the potential to result in significant environmental impacts associated with aesthetics, air quality, historic resources, geologic hazards, use and/or release of hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, population and housing, public services, transportation and traffic and utilities and service systems. In each of the noted cases, the potential impacts on human beings, whether direct or indirect should be incorporated into the cited analyses. Therefore, analysis of such impacts will be included in an EIR.

City of Los Angeles Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community PCR Services Corporation May 2008

Page B-35