CPC-2015-3702-GPA-VZC-SPR - Los Angeles City Planning

DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING

RECOMMENDATION REPORT

City Planning Commission Case No.: CPC-2015-3702-GPA-VZC-

SPR CEQA No.: ENV-2015-3703-MND Related Cases: None Council No.: 12 - Englander Plan Area: Northridge Specific Plan: None Certified NC: Northridge East Existing GPLU: Community Commercial &

Medium Residential Proposed GPLU: Community Commercial Existing Zone: C2-1VL & RA-1 Proposed Zone: (T)[Q]C2-1VL Applicant: Symphony-Northridge, LLC;

David Hilliard Representative: Rosenheim & Associates,

Inc., Brad Rosenheim

Date: February 22, 2018 Time: After 8:30 A.M.* Place: Van Nuys City Hall,

Council Chamber 14410 Sylvan Street, 2nd Floor Van Nuys, California 91401

Public Hearing: January 26, 2018 Appeal Status: General Plan Amendment is not

appealable. Zone Change and Height District Change are appealable only by the applicant to City Council if disapproved in whole or in part. Site Plan Review is appealable to City Council Per LAMC Section 12.36-C.

Expiration Date: March 8, 2018 Multiple Approval: Yes

PROJECT LOCATION:

9530, 9534 & 9546 N. Reseda Boulevard

PROPOSED PROJECT:

The demolition of an existing Post Office, surface parking lot and landscaping for the construction of a 127,062 square-foot mixed-use development proposed at four-stories and 45 feet tall to include 128 residential units (student housing) and 5,725 square feet of ground floor commercial uses with 240 subterranean parking spaces and 157 bicycle spaces. The total proposed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is 1.89 to 1.

REQUESTED ACTION:

1) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15074(b), consideration of the whole of the

administrative record, including the Mitigated Negative Declaration, No. ENV-2015-3703-MND (“Mitigated Negative Declaration”), all comments received, the imposition of mitigation measures and the Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for the Mitigated Negative Declaration.

2) Pursuant to Charter Section 555 and Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) Section 11.5.6, a

General Plan Amendment to the Northridge Community Plan to extend the Community Commercial Land Use designation and Community Center (Special Boundary) 100 feet north at 9546 N. Reseda Boulevard (from Medium Residential), and to add the RAS4 Zone as a corresponding zone to the Community Commercial Land Use designation within the Community Center boundary.

3) Pursuant to LAMC Section 12.32 a Vesting Zone and Height District Change from C2-1VL

and RA-1 to (T)[Q]RAS4-1VL (Residential/Accessory Service Zone with a maximum 3 to 1 floor area ratio).

4) Pursuant to LAMC Section 16.05, a Site Plan Review to allow a unified project for a project

which results in an increase of more than 50 dwelling units or guest rooms.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Project Analysis .................................................................................................................... A-1 Project Summary Background Issues Conclusion (T) Conditions ....................................................................................................................... T-1 [Q] Conditions ....................................................................................................................... Q-1

Conditions of Approval ....................................................................................................... C-1

Findings ................................................................................................................................. F-1 General Plan/Charter Findings Entitlement Findings CEQA Findings Public Hearing and Communications .................................................................................. P-1 Exhibits: Exhibit A – Architectural Plans

Exhibit B – Maps

Radius Map Vicinity Map Existing General Plan Map Requested General Plan Map Existing and Requested Zoning Map

Exhibit C – Environmental Documents

ENV-2015-3703-MND Mitigation Monitoring Program

Exhibit D – Communication

Case No. CPC-2015-3702-GPA-VZC-SPR A-1

PROJECT ANALYSIS Project Summary The project involves the demolition of an existing 26,000 square-foot one-story Post Office, surface parking lot and landscaping for the proposed construction of a 127,062 square-foot, four-story, 45-foot tall mixed-use development to include 128 residential units (student housing) and 5,725 square feet of ground floor commercial uses, up to 240 subterranean parking spaces, and up to 157 bicycle spaces. The total Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the proposed development is 1.89 to 1. There will be approximately 25,000 cubic yards of dirt to be exported through a haul route. The project will add approximately 31,355 square feet of new open space and outdoor amenities including 61 balconies, 32 new trees across the site where a surface parking lot currently exists, a courtyard (south facing pool), paseo, roof deck (fourth floor interior and facing the courtyard), plaza, three fitness rooms (first, second, and third floors north of the courtyard), and shower cabana (south of the proposed pool buffering the courtyard from the commercial buildings on the south). Background The subject property is located on a level, rectangular-shaped, interior site comprised of two parcels (one zoned RA-1 and the second a tied lot zoned C2-1VL as shown in Figure 1), one parcel south of Halsted Street, on the east side of Reseda Boulevard, and totals 64,057.8 square feet of lot area (62,856.5 net square feet after 5-foot sidewalk dedication). The project site has a frontage of approximately 240.26 feet along Reseda Boulevard and a 290.2 foot depth. The site has an access easement along the eastern property line with the abutting lot to the south.

Figure 1. Subject Property and Surrounding Area, Existing Zoning Map


The project site is located within the Northridge Community Plan. The adopted Community Plan currently designates the subject property for Medium Residential and Community Commercial land uses, corresponding to the R3, and CR, C2, C4, RAS3 respectively. The site is zoned RA-1 and C2-1VL, which is partly inconsistent with its current land use designations. The applicant has requested a General Plan Amendment to the Community Plan for a portion of the site from Medium Residential to Community Commercial land use designation, to extend the Community Center (Special Boundary) to the north to include the entire site, and to add the RAS4 Zone as a corresponding zone to the Community Center boundary only, and a Zone Change and Height District Change from RA-1 and C2-1VL to (T)[Q]RAS4-1VL. The existing post office building in the C2-1VL Zone and surface parking in the RA-1 Zone currently occupy the site. The post office building, which is currently operation onsite, has a lease through 2021. As the post office was listed on SurveyLA a Historic Resource Assessment was submitted to the Department of City Planning in August 2016 and was determined to be ineligible for individual listing under any federal, state and local edibility criterion as discussed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (ENV-2015-3703-MND, Exhibit C). Project Entitlements

General Plan Amendments, Zone Change, and Height District Change – The proposed project seeks General Plan Amendments to the Northridge Community Plan to extend the Community Commercial Land Use designation and Community Center (Special Boundary) 100 feet north at 9546 N. Reseda Boulevard, and to add the RAS4 Zone as a corresponding zone to the Community Commercial Land Use designation within the Community Center boundary. Also, a Vesting Zone and Height District Change from C2-1VL and RA-1 to (T)(Q)RAS4-1VL to limit the height, floor area, and density to align with the context and design standards of the neighborhood.

Figure 2. Subject Property and Surrounding Area, Existing Land Use Map


The current zoning and land use is inconsistent and fragmented. Whereas the current RA-1 zoning of the northern parcel permits one dwelling to be developed onsite (Figure 1), it is actually designated for Medium Residential land use (Figure 2) that would permit an R3-1 zone for a maximum 3 to 1 FAR with one unit for each 800 square feet of land (35 dwelling units). The C2-1VL zoning of the tied south parcel already permits a maximum FAR of 1.5 to 1, a 45-foot height, and R4 density (or 97 dwelling units). The Project site could result in a development potential of 132-units and FAR of 124,628 square feet at the highest use and zone with current land use designations. The requested (T)[Q]RAS4-1VL zone permits a maximum FAR of 3 to 1 (192,173 square feet), 50 feet in height, and 160-units. The project is proposing an FAR of 1.89 to 1 (127,062 square feet), 45 feet in height (plus 6.5-foot stairwell projections for rooftop access), 128 dwelling units and 5,725 square feet of commercial space. Approval of the requested plan amendment, zone and height district changes, and site plan review with recommended conditions, would result in a building capacity similar to what is allowed under the existing land use designations. In addition, the approvals would result in a development that similar in size, scope, and scale to some completed projects in the general surrounding vicinity. Moreover, the proposed plan amendment, zone change, and height district change would make the project site consistent with the neighboring four-story, 52-foot tall, 47-unit, residential apartment on the north and five-story, 55-foot tall, mixed-use development (202 residential apartments and 4,050 square foot of commercial space) known as Meridian Place, one block to the southwest of the site.

The proposed development will create private student housing, additional commercial amenities within a half block of the California State University-Northridge (CSUN) campus, and provide a social and dwelling space for students and aligning with the longstanding identity and vision of Northridge. Furthermore, the increased commercial activity in the area will allow more employment opportunities, incentivize local spending and activity, stimulate economic growth, create a pedestrian-friendly shopping area and community, and increase convenience for local residents and workers of the neighborhood. As such, approval of the proposed project would enable the development and use of the site for mixed-use purposes consistent with the scale, demand, and identity of existing developments within the surrounding neighborhood. Staff recommends approval of the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Height District Change requests. Site Plan Review The proposed project involves the demolition of an existing post office building and surface parking lot for the development of a new mixed-use facility. The completed project would consist of a four-story, approximately 45-foot high, 127,062 square-foot, mixed-use development, resulting in 128 residential units and 5,725 square feet of commercial space and two levels of subterranean parking including 240 vehicle spaces and 157 bicycle spaces. As such, the project is subject to Site Plan Review under LAMC Section 16.05 because it results in an increase of more than 50 dwelling units. Staff recommends approval of the Site Plan Review as the project has been designed to be compatible with the surrounding area and in conformance with the applicable policies of the General Plan.

Surrounding Properties The subject property is located within the Northridge Community Plan and partly within the Community Center (Special Boundary) just one parcel south of the southeast corner of Halsted Street and Reseda Boulevard. The project site is located in an area improved with a mix of residential, commercial, mixed-use, and institutional land uses.


Surrounding uses include a four-story 47-unit apartment building (with four unit set aside for very low income) to the north on the corner in the R3-1 Zone, on the east fronting Halstead Street is a two-story 39-unit apartment building and a three-story 37-unit condominium fronting Plummer Street both in the R3-1 Zone, to the south and across the street to the west are commercial shopping centers with surface parking lots in the C2-1VL and P-1VL Zones, and to the southwest is a three-story office building. Beyond the multiple-family to the east is the California State University, Northridge (CSUN). Streets and Circulation

Reseda Boulevard, adjoining the subject property to the west, is a designated Boulevard II, dedicated to a 100 right-of-way width at the project’s street frontage and improved with asphalt roadway, concrete curb gutter, sidewalk, street trees and street lights.

Relevant Cases Subject Property:

Ordinance No. 70,925: Approved on January 27, 1932 which established a 10-foot setback on the easterly side of Reseda Boulevard between the southerly line of Lassen Street and the northerly line of Parthenia Street. (Note: this was prior to Code setbacks and street designations, which have superseded this ordinance.)

Surrounding Properties: The following relevant cases were identified to be within 1,500 feet of the project site and filed within the past 15 years:

Case No. DIR-2017-2314-ZBA – On August 8, 2017 a zone boundary adjustment was approved to exchange approximately 372.3 square feet of C2-1VL zoned land to P-1VL located at 95445 N. Reseda Boulevard. Case No. CPC-2016-633-GPA – On November 20, 2009, the City Planning Commission approved a request for a General Plan Amendment to the Northridge Community Plan to change the designation of the Plummer Street segment from an Avenue II to a Local Street; and to the Mobility Element to change the designation of the Plummer Street segment from an Avenue II to a Local Street for Plummer Street between Darby Avenue and Lindley Avenue (within the campus of California State University –Northridge). Case No. APCNV-2011-2155-ZC-DB-BL – On October 28, 2012, Ordinance Nos. 182,256 and 182,257 became effective which changed the zone from RA-1 and R3-1 to (T)(Q)R3-1 and building line removal for the development of a 52-foot tall, 47-unit density bonus apartment with 11 percent set aside for very low income located at 18432-18452 W. Halsted Street and 9554 N. Reseda Boulevard (abutting the project site on the north). The building was also recorded as a condominium on August 28, 2013 under TT-71664. Case No. APCNV-2005-883-ZC – On March 27, 2006, Ordinance No. 177,348 became effective which changed the zone from RA-1L to (T)(Q)R3-1L for the development of a 43-foot tall, 26-unit apartment building located at 18434 Vincennes Street. Case No. ZA-2004-4210-ZV-SPR – On June 16, 2005, the Zoning Administrator approved variances granting a mixed-use project consisting of no more than 202 dwelling units approximately 4,050 square feet of ground floor retail, and approximately 416 parking spaces on lots zoned P-IVL, C2-1VL, and RA-1; 55-feet in height in lieu 45-feet in Height District No. 1 and in lieu of 36-feet permitted in Height District No. 1VL, an increase in floor area to permit


the construction of 225,695-square feet in lieu of the 156,228-square feet otherwise allowed, and an increase in the number of stories to five in lieu of the three stories allowed in Height District 1 VL; containing 202 multiple residential dwelling units in lieu of the 46 dwelling units otherwise allowed; and, granting a front yard setback of 15-feet in lieu of 25-feet from Gledhill Street, located at 9423 Reseda Boulevard and 18550 Gledhill Street. Case No. APCNV-2002-2559-ZC – On April 23, 2003, Ordinance No. 175,122 became effective which changed the zone of a portion of the site from P-1VL to C2-1VL for the addition of a new two-story 30,800 square foot storage building located at 95445 N. Reseda Boulevard.

Public Hearing A public hearing on this matter with the Hearing Officer was held at the Marvin Braude San Fernando Valley Constituent Service Center on January 26, 2018. (see Public Hearing and Communications, Page P-1) Professional Volunteer Program The Urban Design Studio’s Professional Volunteer Program (PVP) reviewed the proposed project on July 5, 2016 and stated the following:

• Overall this is a wonderful building and use of space for the site. Wish all student housing had this many amenities.

• Verify if the existing post office is eligible for historic designation and, if so, what Office of Historic Resources (OHR) requirements would be. Post office facade may need to be preserved and integrated into the building design, depending on OHR feedback.

• Provide landscaping plan detailing the materials and location of planting vs paving, etc. • Ensure the building lobby is ADA accessible (provide ADA ramp to access the elevators).

More emphasis should be given to the housing entrance at the first level. • Consider working with the color palette - a lighter gray may be more suitable for the

massing (one option, others liked it as shown). • Ensure that the existing articulation features are maintained (projected/boxed balconies,

etc.)


Note: Architectural updates to the second through fourth floors above the residential entrance were provided by the applicant given the PVP comment to emphasis the housing entrance. The perspective shows the residential entrance from the street level. Issues The following section includes a discussion of issues related to the project. Most issues were identified prior to the public hearing, and/or in discussions with the applicant. Project Entitlements The case, filed on October 9, 2015, was submitted to the Department of City Planning Development Services Center, and forwarded to the Valley Project Planning Division for review as CPC-2015-3702-ZC-SPR-ZV (no General Plan Amendment was requested). On March 21, 2016 the applicant revised their application as management had approved to case to be filed with General Plan Amendments in lieu of the originally requested multiple variances in conjunction with a proposed dual zone project. In August 2016 a Historic Resources Assessment was submitted to the file as the subject building onsite was listed on SurveyLA. The Historic Resource Assessment determined the post office building to be ineligible for individual listing under any federal, state and local edibility criterion, based on the fact that although “the building was associated with historic theses like Post-War Suburban Development, Post Office Facilities after World War II, Maxwell Starkman and Mid-Century Modernism, it does not appear to possess significant associations with those themes as an individual resource”. The Office of Historic Resource reviewed the assessment and agreed with tits conclusions. On December 2, 2016, the applicant changed the Zone Change to a Vested Zone and Height District Change as Measure JJJ was added to the ballot. On December 7, 2016 the project was deemed complete and therefore not subject to Measure JJJ. Parking Comments were received regarding potential impacts related to parking. Members of the public were concerned that the project needed more than Code required parking and believe the excess parking is sufficient as revised and would eliminate the already limited supply of street parking in the area. The project is proposing 240 parking spaces on-site, which would be three spaces more than the maximum 237 spaces required by the LAMC for the proposed dwelling units (185 spaces for the residential and 53 spaces for restaurant uses parked at 1:100 and 2 spaces for commercial retail parked at 1:250). As the project is proposing three (3) parking spaces more than required for the combined residential uses and would therefore be over parked. The project was originally filed with 205 parking spaces and updated to 238 parking spaces with all retail commercial space do to comments received during the applicant’s community outreach. The submitted plans dated February 7, 2018 (received February 12, 2018) show 240 parking spaces. Further the leasing office may need to be parked at a ratio of 1:500, which would account for the three additional parking spaces proposed. If this space was ever converted to retail space an additional three (3) parking spaces would be necessary or 12 additional bicycle parking spaces. Ground Floor Commercial The 1,530 square foot retail area shown on the Landscape Plan proposed in the northwest corner of the development is actually called out as a leasing area and as common open space on the floor plans and Open Space Tabulations. The Northridge East Neighborhood Council stated at the public hearing that they would like this to be converted to commercial space once the


apartments are near rented to capacity. To allow for that flexibility, the condition has been drafted to include that area into the maximum commercial square footage allowed. Conclusion Based on the public hearing and information submitted to the record, staff recommends that the City Planning Commission approve and recommend adoption of the General Plan Amendments to re-designate a portion of the project site from Medium Residential to Community Commercial, adopt the extension of the special boundary for the entire site, add the RAS4 zone to be permitted within the special boundary only, and approve the Zone Change and Height District Change from C2-1VL and RA-1 to (T)[Q]RAS4-1VL. Staff also recommends that the City Planning Commission approve Site Plan Review for the development of 127,062 square-foot, four-story, 45-foot tall mixed-use development. Additionally, staff recommends that the City Planning Commission find, based on its independent judgement, after consideration of the entire administrative record, that the project was environmentally assessed under ENV-2015-3703-MND for the above referenced project. The project site is located within the Community Center (“Special Boundary”) of the Northridge Community Plan and is a half block west of California State University –Northridge, a neighborhood planned for commercial, mixed-use and residential uses. While the proposed development would be a greater density than the immediately surrounding buildings, the project would be similar in size, scope and scale to the completed project located at 9423 Reseda Boulevard. Moreover, the proposed plan amendment, zone change, and height district change would unify the project site. The focus on the proposed student housing would provide additional options for students within walking distance to campus. Furthermore, the increased commercial activity in the area will allow more employment opportunities, incentivize local spending and activity, stimulate economic growth, create a pedestrian-friendly shopping area and community, and increase convenience for local residents and workers of the neighborhood. As such, approval of the proposed project would enable the development and use of the site for mixed-use purposes consistent with the scale, demand, and identity of existing developments within the surrounding neighborhood.

Case No. CPC-2015-3702-GPA-VZC-SPR T-1

CONDITIONS FOR EFFECTUATING (T)

TENTATIVE CLASSIFICATION REMOVAL Pursuant to Section 12.32-G of the Municipal Code, the (T) Tentative Classification shall be removed by the recordation of a final parcel or tract map or by posting of guarantees through the B-permit process of the City Engineer to secure the following without expense to the City of Los Angeles, with copies of any approval or guarantees provided to the Department of City Planning for attachment to the subject planning case file. Dedications and Improvements. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, public improvements and dedications for streets and other rights-of-way adjoining the subject property shall be guaranteed to the satisfaction of the Bureau of Engineering, Department of Transportation, Fire Department (and other responsible City, regional, and Federal government agencies as may be necessary). Responsibilities/Guarantees. 1. As part of early consultation, plan review, and/or project permit review, the

applicant/developer shall contact the responsible agencies to ensure that any necessary dedications and improvements are specifically acknowledged by the applicant/developer.

2. Bureau of Engineering (BOE). Prior to the issuance of sign-offs for final site plan approval

and/or project permits by the Department of City Planning, the applicant/developer shall provide written verification to the Department of City Planning from the responsible agency acknowledging the agency’s consultation with the applicant/developer. The required dedications and improvements may necessitate redesign of the project. Any changes to the project design required by a public agency shall be documented in writing and submitted for review by the Department of City Planning.

a. Street Dedications:

i. Reseda Boulevard (Boulevard II) – Dedicate a 5-foot wide strip of land along the

property frontage to complete a 55-foot wide half right-of-way dedication in accordance with Boulevard II standards of Mobility Plan 2035.

b. Street Improvements:

i. Construct additional concrete sidewalk in the newly dedicated area to provide 15-

foot wide concrete sidewalk in accordance with Boulevard II standards of Mobility Plan 2035.

ii. Repair or replace all broken, off-grade, or bad order concrete sidewalk, curb, and gutter. Close all unused driveways to comply with ADA requirements. Repair or replace other existing public improvements that may get damaged during construction of the proposed project. These improvements should suitably transition to join the existing improvements to the satisfactory of the City Engineer.

iii. Roof drainage and surface run-off from the project shall be collected and treated at the site and directed to the streets via drain systems constructed under the sidewalk and through the curb drains or connections to the catch basins.

iv. Mainline sewers exist in Reseda Boulevard. Extension of the 6-inch house connection laterals to the new property line may be required. All sewerage Facilities Charges and Bonded Sewer Fees are to be paid prior to obtaining a building permit.


v. An investigation by Bureau of Engineering Valley District Office Sewer Counter may be necessary to determine the capacity of the existing public sewer to accommodate the proposed development. Submit a request to the Valley District Office of Bureau of Engineering (818) 374-5088.

vi. Submit a parking area and driveway plan to the Valley District Office of the Bureau of Engineering and the Department of Transportation for review and approval.

3. Urban Forestry. Plant street trees and remove any existing trees within dedicated streets

or proposed dedicated streets as required by the Urban Forestry Division of the Bureau of Street Services. All street tree plantings shall be brought up to current standards. When the City has previously been paid for tree plantings, the subdivider or contractor shall notify the Urban Forestry Division (213-847-3077) upon completion of construction to expedite tree planting.

Note: All protected tree removals must be approved by the Board of Public Works. Contact Urban Forestry Division at: 213-847-3077

4. Bureau of Street Lighting. No street lighting improvement if no street widening per BOE

improvement conditions. Otherwise relocated and upgrade street lights: one (1) on Reseda Boulevard.

Notes: The quantity of street lights identified may be modified slightly during the plan check process based on illumination calculations and equipment selection.

Conditions set: 1) in compliance with a Specific Plan, 2) by LADOT, or 3) by other legal instrument excluding the Bureau of Engineering conditions, requiring an improvement that will change the geometrics of the public roadway or driveway apron may require additional or the reconstruction of street lighting improvements as part of that condition.

5. Department of Transportation. a. A minimum 40-foot reservoir space is required between any security gate or parking

space and the property line, to the satisfaction of DOT. Backing out onto Reseda Boulevard and Plummer Street shall be prohibited.

b. Driveway apron width of W=30 feet is required for two-way driveways, and W=16 feet is required for one-way driveways.

c. A parking area and driveway plan should be submitted to the Citywide Planning Coordination Section of the Department of Transportation for approval prior to submittal of building permit plans for plan check by the Department of Building and Safety. Transportation approvals are conducted at 6262 Van Nuys Blvd., Room 320, Van Nuys, CA 91401.

d. That the subdivision report fee and condition clearance fee be paid to the Department of Transportation as required per Ordinance No. 183270 and LAMC Section 19.15 prior to recordation of the final map. Note: the applicant may be required to comply with any other applicable fees per this new ordinance.

6. Fire Department.

a. Submit plot plans for Fire Department approval and review prior to recordation of City Planning Case.

b. Any required Fire Annunciator panel or Fire Control Room shall be located within 50ft visual line of site of the main entrance stairwell or to the satisfaction of the Fire Department.


c. Where rescue window access is required, provide conditions and improvements necessary to meet accessibility standards as determined by the Los Angeles Fire Department.

d. Any roof elevation changes in excess of 3 feet may require the installation of ships ladders.

e. Fire lane width shall not be less than 20 feet. When a fire lane must accommodate the operation of Fire Department aerial ladder apparatus or where fire hydrants are installed, those portions shall not be less than 28 feet in width.

f. The width of private roadways for general access use and fire lanes shall not be less than 20 feet, and the fire lane must be clear to the sky.

g. Fire lanes, where required and dead ending streets shall terminate in a cul-de-sac or other approved turning area. No dead ending street or fire lane shall be greater than 700 feet in length or secondary access shall be required.

h. Submit plot plans indicating access road and turning area for Fire Department approval. i. Adequate off-site public and on-site private fire hydrants may be required. Their number

and location to be determined after the Fire Department's review of the plot plan. j. The Fire Department may require additional roof access via parapet access roof ladders

where buildings exceed 28 feet in height, and when overhead wires or other obstructions block aerial ladder access.

k. All parking restrictions for fire lanes shall be posted and/or painted prior to any Temporary Certificate of Occupancy being issued.

l. Plans showing areas to be posted and/or painted, “FIRE LANE NO PARKING” shall be submitted and approved by the Fire Department prior to building permit application sign-off.

m. Electric Gates approved by the Fire Department shall be tested by the Fire Department prior to Building and Safety granting a Certificate of Occupancy.

n. No framing shall be allowed until the roadway is installed to the satisfaction of the Fire Department.

o. Any required fire hydrants to be installed shall be fully operational and accepted by the Fire Department prior to any building construction.

p. 5101.1 Emergency responder radio coverage in new buildings. All new buildings shall have approved radio coverage for emergency responders within the building based upon the existing coverage levels of the public safety communication systems of the jurisdiction at the exterior of the building. This section shall not require improvement of the existing public safety communication systems.

Note: The applicant is further advised that all subsequent contact regarding these conditions must be with the Hydrant and Access Unit. This would include clarification, verification of condition compliance and plans or building permit applications, etc., and shall be accomplished BY APPOINTMENT ONLY, in order to assure that you receive service with a minimum amount of waiting please call (818) 374-4351. You should advise any consultant representing you of this requirement as well.

Case No. CPC-2015-3702-GPA-VZC-SPR Q-1

[Q] QUALIFIED CONDITIONS Pursuant to Section 12.32 G of the Municipal Code, the following limitations are hereby imposed upon the use of the subject property, subject to the “Q” Qualified classification. 1. Use. The use and area regulations of the development shall be developed for uses as

permitted in the RAS4 Zone as defined in LAMC Section 12.11.5, except as modified by the conditions herein or subsequent action.

2. Site Development. The use and development of the property shall be in substantial conformance with the plans submitted with the application and marked Exhibit “A”, dated February 7, 2018 except as may be revised as a result of this action.

3. Density. The project shall be limited to a maximum density of 128 residential dwelling units and up to 7,255 square feet of commercial.

4. Floor Area. The total floor area shall not exceed 127,062 square feet (approximately 1.89 to 1 Floor Area Ratio) of commercial development, as shown on Exhibit “A”.

5. Height. The building height shall be permitted as defined in LAMC Section 12.21.1 A.1 and

shall not exceed a height of 45 feet, excluding roof structures and equipment as defined by LAMC Section 12.21.1.

Case No. CPC-2015-3702-GPA-VZC-SPR C-1

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The following conditions are hereby imposed upon the use of the subject property: Entitlement Conditions 1. Site Development. The use and development of the property shall be in substantial

conformance with the plans submitted with the application and marked Exhibit “A”, dated February 7, 2018 except as may be revised as a result of this action.

2. Parking. Parking shall be in conformance with Section 12.21 A. 4 for residential and

commercial uses.

a. Electric Vehicle Parking. The project shall include at least 20 percent (20%) of the total automobile parking spaces developed on the project site capable of supporting future electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). Plans shall indicate the proposed type and location(s) of EVSE and also include raceway method(s), wiring schematics and electrical calculations to verify that the electrical system has sufficient capacity to simultaneously charge all electric vehicles at all designated EV charging locations at their full rated amperage. Plan design shall be based upon Level 2 or greater EVSE at its maximum operating ampacity. In addition, five percent (5%) of the total automobile parking spaces developed on the project site, and all parking spaces in excess of LAMC-required spaces for the use, shall be further provided with EV chargers to immediately accommodate electric vehicles within the parking areas. When the application of either the required 20 percent or five percent results in a fractional space, round up to the next whole number. A label stating “EV CAPABLE” shall be posted in a conspicuous place at the service panel or subpanel and next to the raceway termination point.

b. Automobile parking provided in excess of the residential requirements of the Los

Angeles Municipal Code shall be open to the public during commercial business hours. 3. Bicycle Parking. Bicycle parking shall be provided in compliance with LAMC Sections

12.21-A,4 and 12.21-A,16.

4. Solar Ready Buildings. a. The project shall comply with the Los Angeles Municipal Green Building Code,

Section 95.05.211, to the satisfaction of the Department of Building and Safety. b. The Project shall install of solar panels on the rooftop level, a minimum 25 percent

(25%), as part of a photovoltaic system, to be maintained for the life of the Project. Exhibit “A” shall be revised (roof plan) to incorporate this condition.

5. Mechanical Equipment. All mechanical equipment shall be fully screened from view of any

abutting properties and the public right-of-way.

6. Lighting. Outdoor lighting shall be designed and installed with shielding, such that the light source cannot be seen from adjacent residential properties, the public right-of-way, nor from above.


7. Landscaping. The project shall comply with the Landscape Plan in Exhibit “A” as follows: a. Amenity deck on the fourth floor shall include attractively landscaped passive outdoor

areas and be included on a revised landscape plan. b. Tree Wells.

i. The minimum depth of tree wells on the rooftop shall me as follows:

1. Minimum depth for trees shall be 42 inches 2. Minimum depth for shrubs shall be 30 inches. 3. Minimum depth for herbaceous plantings and ground cover shall be 18

inches. 4. Minimum depth for an extensive green roof shall be 3 inches.

ii. The minimum amount of soil volume for tree wells on the rooftop shall be based

on the size of the tree at maturity:

1. 600 cubic feet for a small tree (less than 25 feet tall at maturity). 2. 900 cubic feet for a medium tree (25-40 feet tall at maturity). 3. 1,200 cubic feet for a large tree (more than 40 feet tall at maturity).

c. All rooftop equipment and appurtenances shall be screened from public view using

landscaping or shall be architecturally integrated into the design of the building.

8. Trash/Storage. All trash collecting and storage areas shall be located on-site and not visible from the public right-of-way. a. Trash receptacles shall be enclosed and/or covered at all times.

b. Trash/recycling containers shall be locked when not in use.

9. Graffiti. All graffiti on the site shall be removed or painted over to match the color of the surface to which it is applied within 24 hours of its occurrence.

10. A copy of the first page of this grant and all Conditions and/or any subsequent appeal of this grant and its resultant Conditions and/or letters of clarification shall be printed on the building plans submitted to the Development Services Center and the Department of Building and Safety for purposes of having a building permit issued.

Environmental Conditions – Mitigation Measures 11. Habitat Modification (Nesting Native Birds, Non-Hillside or Urban Areas).

a. The project will result in the removal of vegetation and disturbances to the ground and

therefore may result in take of nesting native bird species. Migratory nongame native bird species are protected by international treaty under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (50 C.F.R Section 10.13). Sections 3503, 3503.5 and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibit take of all birds and their active nests including raptors and other migratory nongame birds (as listed under the Federal MBTA).

b. Proposed project activities (including disturbances to native and non-native vegetation, structures and substrates) should take place outside of the breeding bird season which


generally runs from March 1- August 31 (as early as February 1 for raptors) to avoid take (including disturbances which would cause abandonment of active nests containing eggs and/or young). Take means to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture or kill (Fish and Game Code Section 86).

c. If project activities cannot feasibly avoid the breeding bird season, beginning thirty days

prior to the disturbance of suitable nesting habitat, the applicant shall:

• Arrange for weekly bird surveys to detect any protected native birds in the habitat to be removed and any other such habitat within properties adjacent to the project site, as access to adjacent areas allows. The surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist with experience in conducting breeding bird surveys. The surveys shall continue on a weekly basis with the last survey being conducted no more than 3 days prior to the initiation of clearance/construction work.

• If a protected native bird is found, the applicant shall delay all clearance/construction disturbance activities within 300 feet of suitable nesting habitat for the observed protected bird species until August 31.

• Alternatively, the Qualified Biologist could continue the surveys in order to locate any nests. If an active nest is located, clearing and construction within 300 feet of the nest or as determined by a qualified biological monitor, shall be postponed until the nest is vacated and juveniles have fledged and when there is no evidence of a second attempt at nesting. The buffer zone from the nest shall be established in the field with flagging and stakes. Construction personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of the area.

d. The applicant shall record the results of the recommended protective measures

described above to document compliance with applicable State and Federal laws pertaining to the protection of native birds. Such record shall be submitted and received into the case file for the associated discretionary action permitting the project.

12. Tree Removal (Non-Protected Trees). Environmental impacts from project implementation

may result due to the loss of significant trees on the site. However, the potential impacts will be mitigated to a less than significant level by the following measures: a. Prior to the issuance of any permit, a plot plan shall be prepared indicating the location,

size, type, and general condition of all existing trees on the site and within the adjacent public right(s)-of-way.

b. Removal or planting of any tree in the public right-of-way requires approval of the Board of Public Works. Contact Urban Forestry Division at: 213-847-3077. All trees in the public right-of-way shall be provided per the current standards of the Urban Forestry Division, Bureau of Street Services, Department of Public Works.

13. Cultural/Historic Resources. The project will result in an impact on identified

cultural/historical resources. However, the impact can be reduced to a less than significant level though compliance with the following measure(s):

a. If archaeological resources are discovered during excavation, grading, or construction

activities, work shall cease in the area of the find until a qualified archaeologist has evaluated the find in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines, including those set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. Per regulatory compliance measures, Personnel of the proposed Modified Project shall not collect or


move any archaeological materials and associated materials. Construction activity may continue unimpeded on other portions of the Project site. The found deposits would be treated in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines, including those set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

14. Grading (20,000 Cubic Yards, or 60,000 Square Feet of Surface Area or Greater).

Impacts will result from the alteration of natural landforms due to extensive grading activities. However, this impact will be mitigated to a less than significant level by designing the grading plan to conform with the City's Landform Grading Manual guidelines, subject to approval by the Department of City Planning and the Department of Building and Safety's Grading Division. Chapter IX, Division 70 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code addresses grading, excavations, and fills. All grading activities require grading permits from the Department of Building and Safety. Additional provisions are required for grading activities within Hillside areas. The application of BMPs includes but is not limited to the following mitigation measures: a. A deputy grading inspector shall be on-site during grading operations, at the owner’s

expense, to verify compliance with these conditions. The deputy inspector shall report weekly to the Department of Building and Safety (LADBS); however, they shall immediately notify LADBS if any conditions are violated.

b. “Silt fencing” supported by hay bales and/or sand bags shall be installed based upon the

final evaluation and approval of the deputy inspector to minimize water and/or soil from going through the chain link fencing potentially resulting in silt washing off-site and creating mud accumulation impacts.

c. “Orange fencing” shall not be permitted as a protective barrier from the secondary

impacts normally associated with grading activities. d. Movement and removal of approved fencing shall not occur without prior approval by

LADBS.

15. Increased Noise Levels (Demolition, Grading, and Construction Activities). a. Construction and demolition shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 am to 6:00 pm

Monday through Friday, and 8:00 am to 6:00 pm on Saturday.

b. Demolition and construction activities shall be scheduled so as to avoid operating several pieces of equipment simultaneously, which causes high noise levels.

c. The project contractor shall use power construction equipment with state-of-the-art noise shielding and muffling devices.

d. The construction contractor shall use on-site electrical sources or solar generators to power equipment rather than diesel generators where feasible.

16. Increased Noise Levels (Mixed-Use Development). Environmental impacts to proposed on-site residential uses from noises generated by proposed on-site commercial uses may result from project implementation. However, the potential impact will be mitigated to a less than significant level by the following measure:


a. Wall and floor-ceiling assemblies separating commercial tenant spaces, residential units, and public places, shall have a Sound Transmission Class (STC) value of at least 50, as determined in accordance with ASTM E90 and ASTM E413.

17. Severe Noise Levels (Residential Fronting on Major or Secondary Highway, or

adjacent to a Freeway). Environmental impacts to future occupants may result from this project's implementation due to mobile noise. However, these impacts will be mitigated to a less than significant level by the following measures: a. All exterior windows having a line of sight of a Major or Secondary Highway shall be

constructed with double-pane glass and use exterior wall construction which provides a Sound Transmission Class (STC) value of 50, as determined in accordance with ASTM E90 and ASTM E413, or any amendment thereto.

b. The applicant, as an alternative, may retain an acoustical engineer to submit evidence, along with the application for a building permit, any alternative means of sound insulation sufficient to mitigate interior noise levels below a CNEL of 45 dBA in any habitable room.

18. Transportation/Traffic. The project will result in impacts to transportation and/or traffic

systems. However, the impact can be reduced to a less than significant level though compliance with the following measure(s): a. Applicant shall plan construction and construction staging as to maintain pedestrian

access on adjacent sidewalks throughout all construction phases. This requires the applicant to maintain adequate and safe pedestrian protection, including physical separation (including utilization of barriers such as K-Rails or scaffolding, etc.) from work space and vehicular traffic and overhead protection, due to sidewalk closure or blockage, at all times.

b. Temporary pedestrian facilities should be adjacent to the project site and provide safe,

accessible routes that replicate as nearly as practical the most desirable characteristics of the existing facility.

c. Covered walkways shall be provided where pedestrians are exposed to potential injury

from falling objects. d. Applicant shall keep sidewalk open during construction until only when it is absolutely

required to close or block sidewalk for construction staging. Sidewalk shall be reopened as soon as reasonably feasible taking construction and construction staging into account.

Administrative Conditions

19. Condition Re: Tribal Cultural Resource Inadvertent Discovery. In the event that objects

or artifacts that may be tribal cultural resources are encountered during the course of any ground disturbance activities1, all such activities shall temporarily cease on the project site until the potential tribal cultural resources are properly assessed and addressed pursuant to the process set forth below:

1 Ground disturbance activities shall include the following: excavating, digging, trenching, plowing, drilling, tunneling, quarrying, grading, leveling, removing peat, clearing, pounding posts, augering, backfilling, blasting, stripping topsoil or a similar activity


• Upon a discovery of a potential tribal cultural resource, the project Permittee shall immediately stop all ground disturbance activities and contact the following: (1) all California Native American tribes that have informed the City they are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project; (2) and the Department of City Planning Development Service Center at (818) 374-5050, (213) 482-7077 or (310) 231-2595.

• If the City determines, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21074 (a)(2), that the

object or artifact appears to be tribal cultural resource, the City shall provide any effected tribe a reasonable period of time, not less than 30 days, to conduct a site visit and make recommendations to the Project permittee and the City regarding the monitoring of future ground disturbance activities, as well as the treatment and disposition of any discovered tribal cultural resources.

• The project Permittee shall implement the tribe’s recommendations if a qualified archaeologist, retained by the City and paid for by the project Permittee, reasonably concludes that the tribe’s recommendations are reasonable and feasible.

• The project Permittee shall submit a tribal cultural resource monitoring plan to the City

that includes all recommendations from the City and any effected tribes that have been reviewed and determined by the qualified archaeologist to be reasonable and feasible. The project Permittee shall not be allowed to recommence ground disturbance activities until this plan is approved by the City.

• If the project Permittee does not accept a particular recommendation determined to be

reasonable and feasible by the qualified archaeologist, the project Permittee may request mediation by a mediator agreed to by the Permittee and the City who has the requisite professional qualifications and experience to mediate such a dispute. The project Permittee shall pay any costs associated with the mediation.

• The project Permittee may recommence ground disturbance activities outside of a

specified radius of the discovery site, so long as this radius has been reviewed by the qualified archaeologist and determined to be reasonable and appropriate.

• Copies of any subsequent prehistoric archaeological study, tribal cultural resources

study or report, detailing the nature of any significant tribal cultural resources, remedial actions taken, and disposition of any significant tribal cultural resources shall be submitted to the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University, Fullerton.

• Notwithstanding the above, any information determined to be confidential in nature, by

the City Attorney’s office, shall be excluded from submission to the SCCIC or the general public under the applicable provisions of the California Public Records Act, California Public Resources Code, and shall comply with the City’s AB 52 Confidentiality Protocols.

20. Approvals, Verification and Submittals. Copies of any approvals, guarantees or

verification of consultations, reviews or approval, plans, etc., as may be required by the subject conditions, shall be provided to the Department of City Planning for placement in the subject file

21. Code Compliance. All area, height and use regulations of the zone classification of the

subject property shall be complied with, except wherein these conditions explicitly allow otherwise.


22. Covenant. Prior to the issuance of any permits relative to this matter, an agreement concerning all the information contained in these conditions shall be recorded in the County Recorder’s Office. The agreement shall run with the land and shall be binding on any subsequent property owners, heirs or assign. The agreement must be submitted to the Department of City Planning for approval before being recorded. After recordation, a copy bearing the Recorder’s number and date shall be provided to the Department of City Planning for attachment to the file.

23. Definition. Any agencies, public officials or legislation referenced in these conditions shall

mean those agencies, public offices, legislation or their successors, designees or amendment to any legislation.

24. Enforcement. Compliance with these conditions and the intent of these conditions shall be

to the satisfaction of the Department of City Planning and any designated agency, or the agency’s successor and in accordance with any stated laws or regulations, or any amendments thereto.

25. Building Plans. A copy of the first page of this grant and all Conditions and/or any

subsequent appeal of this grant and its resultant Conditions and/or letters of clarification shall be printed on the building plans submitted to the Development Services Center and the Department of Building and Safety for purposes of having a building permit issued.

26. Corrective Conditions. The authorized use shall be conducted at all times with due regard

for the character of the surrounding district, and the right is reserved to the City Planning Commission, or the Director pursuant to Section 12.27.1 of the Municipal Code, to impose additional corrective conditions, if, in the Commission’s or Director’s opinion, such conditions are proven necessary for the protection of persons in the neighborhood or occupants of adjacent property.

27. Indemnification and Reimbursement of Litigation Costs.

Applicant shall do all of the following:

a. Defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all actions against the City

relating to or arising out of, in whole or in part, the City’s processing and approval of this entitlement, including but not limited to, an action to attack, challenge, set aside, void, or otherwise modify or annul the approval of the entitlement, the environmental review of the entitlement, or the approval of subsequent permit decisions, or to claim personal property damage, including from inverse condemnation or any other constitutional claim.

b. Reimburse the City for any and all costs incurred in defense of an action related to or

arising out of, in whole or in part, the City’s processing and approval of the entitlement, including but not limited to payment of all court costs and attorney’s fees, costs of any judgments or awards against the City (including an award of attorney’s fees), damages, and/or settlement costs.

c. Submit an initial deposit for the City’s litigation costs to the City within 10 days’ notice

of the City tendering defense to the Applicant and requesting a deposit. The initial deposit shall be in an amount set by the City Attorney’s Office, in its sole discretion, based on the nature and scope of action, but in no event shall the initial deposit be less than $50,000. The City’s failure to notice or collect the deposit does not relieve


the Applicant from responsibility to reimburse the City pursuant to the requirement in paragraph (ii).

d. Submit supplemental deposits upon notice by the City. Supplemental deposits may be

required in an increased amount from the initial deposit if found necessary by the City to protect the City’s interests. The City’s failure to notice or collect the deposit does not relieve the Applicant from responsibility to reimburse the City pursuant to the requirement in paragraph (ii).

e. If the City determines it necessary to protect the City’s interest, execute an indemnity

and reimbursement agreement with the City under terms consistent with the requirements of this condition.

The City shall notify the applicant within a reasonable period of time of its receipt of any action and the City shall cooperate in the defense. If the City fails to notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding in a reasonable time, or if the City fails to reasonably cooperate in the defense, the applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify or hold harmless the City. The City shall have the sole right to choose its counsel, including the City Attorney’s office or outside counsel. At its sole discretion, the City may participate at its own expense in the defense of any action, but such participation shall not relieve the applicant of any obligation imposed by this condition. In the event the Applicant fails to comply with this condition, in whole or in part, the City may withdraw its defense of the action, void its approval of the entitlement, or take any other action. The City retains the right to make all decisions with respect to its representations in any legal proceeding, including its inherent right to abandon or settle litigation. For purposes of this condition, the following definitions apply:

“City” shall be defined to include the City, its agents, officers, boards, commissions, committees, employees, and volunteers. “Action” shall be defined to include suits, proceedings (including those held under alternative dispute resolution procedures), claims, or lawsuits. Actions include actions, as defined herein, alleging failure to comply with any federal, state or local law.

Nothing in the definitions included in this paragraph are intended to limit the rights of the City or the obligations of the Applicant otherwise created by this condition.

Case No. CPC-2015-3702-GPA-VZC-SPR F-1

FINDINGS General Plan/Charter Findings 1. General Plan Land Use Designation.

The project site is located within the Northridge Community Plan, which was last updated by the City Council on February 24, 1998 (Council File No. 98-0027). The subject property is a rectangular-shaped site, which is comprised of two parcels consisting of approximately 67,057.8 square feet of lot area (65,861.55 net square feet after dedication). The Community Plan designates the site with a land use designations of Medium Residential and Community Commercial land uses, corresponding to the R3, and CR, C2, C4, RAS3 respectively. The site is presently zoned RA-1 and C2-1VL, which is partly inconsistent with its current land use designations. As proposed, the amendments would re-designate the northern parcel of the project site from Medium Residential to Community Commercial, which lists the following corresponding zones: CR, C2, C4, and RAS3; extend the Community Center (Special Boundary) to the north property line; and, add the RAS4 Zone as a corresponding zone to sites within the Community Center only. The requested zone and height district change to RA-1 and C2-1VL to (T)[Q]RAS4-1VL for the project site would be consistent with the adoption of the recommended plan amendments and would be in substantial conformance with the purpose, intent, and provisions of the General Plan as it is reflected within the Northridge Community Plan.

2. General Plan Text. The development of the project represents the opportunity to achieve

the overarching goals of the Northridge Community Plan, which include improving the function, design, and economic vitality of the commercial corridors and job producing uses that will improve the economic and physical condition of the Plan area. Along with providing private, market-rate University housing through the mixed-use development along Reseda Boulevard (a commercial corridor), the proposed development furthers the following Community Plan goals, objectives and policies:

Goal 1: A safe, secure, and high quality residential environment for all economic, age, and ethnic segments of the community.

Objective 1-1: To provide for the preservation of existing and the development of new housing to meet the diverse economic and physical needs of the existing residents and projected population of the Plan area to the year 2010.

Policy 1-1.3: New single and multi-family residential development should be designed in accordance with the Urban Design Chapter.

Objective 1-2: To locate new housing appropriately in a manner which reduces vehicular trips and which increases accessibility to services and facilities. Policy 1-2.1: Locate higher residential densities near commercial

centers, commuter rail stations, and bus routes where public service facilities, utilities, and topography will accommodate this development.

Policy 1-2.3: Provide for an adequate supply of housing to meet the

needs of students attending California State University at Northridge,


without creating adverse impacts on adjacent permanent residential neighborhoods.

Objective 1-5: To promote and insure the provision of adequate housing for all persons regardless of income, age or ethnic background.

Policy 1-5.3: Promote housing in mixed use projects in pedestrian-oriented and transit intensive locations.

Program: Consider providing bonuses in floor area and height for such projects.

Create pedestrian-friendly shopping areas by incorporating street trees, benches, convenient parking/access, and maintaining retail frontage at ground level. The Reseda Boulevard commercial core is emphasized in the Community Plan as a pedestrian-oriented area combined with mixed residential and commercial uses, due to the proximity of California State University. [Re]visit [Re]seda was a recent event that highlighted transportation safety and community engagement through the Mayor’s Great Streets Initiative. Infrastructure such as protected bicycle lanes, solar powered bus benches, street furniture and street trees have been added just south of the project site. Sidewalk repair and weekly overnight street sweeping are conducted through Bureau of Street Services and Department of Transportation to implement proactive infrastructure maintenance. The project will further these goal as the first floor provides an active street frontage with neighborhood serving commercial uses, continuation of street trees, and providing ample bicycle parking which can be accessed from the bike lane fronting the project site.

Goal 2: A strong and competitive commercial sector which best serves the needs of the community through maximum efficiency and accessibility while preserving the unique character of the community.

Objective 2-1: To maintain the viability and vitality of the existing Northridge Central Community Business District as a community focal point.

Policy 2-1.1: Encourage retail and service commercial uses, including professional services and restaurants on both sides of Reseda Boulevard. Fast food restaurants and mini-malls should be discouraged. Policy 2-1.4: Require that projects be designed and developed to achieve a high level of quality, distinctive character, and compatibility with existing uses and developed in accordance with design standards.

Objective 2-2: To enhance the community identity in distinctive commercial districts.

Policy 2-2.1: Improve security and parking standards in commercial areas. Where new development occurs, parking should be located in the rear of buildings. Policy 2-2.2: Require that mixed-use projects be designed with commercial uses on the ground floor and developed to achieve a high level of quality, distinctive character, and compatibility with existing uses.


Policy 2-2.3: Encourage pedestrian activity on both sides of Reseda Boulevard, particularly between Nordhoff Street and Halsted Street near the University.

Goal 14: A system of safe, efficient and attractive bicycle, pedestrian and equestrian facilities.

Objective 14-1: To promote an adequate system of safe bikeways for commuter, school and recreational use.

Policy 14-1.1: Plan for and encourage funding and construction of bicycle facilities connecting residential neighborhoods to schools, open space areas and employment centers. Policy14-1.4: Encourage the provision of changing rooms, showers, and bicycle storage at new and existing non-residential developments and public places.

Goal 15: A sufficient system of well-designed and convenient on-street and off-street parking facilities through-out the plan area.

Objective 15-1: To provide parking in appropriate locations in accord with Citywide standards and community needs.

Policy 15-1.1: Consolidate parking, where appropriate, to eliminate the number of ingress and egress points onto arterials. Policy 15-1.2: Encourage shared parking for mixed-use projects.

Program: The decision-maker should consider shared parking as a condition of approval for mixed-use projects.

The project is designed to maximize the ground floor of the building with the aforementioned commercial uses as well as a ground floor paseo and improved streetscape adding to and enhancing the pedestrian experience of the neighborhood. The upper floors of residential uses of the building will provide market-rate housing along the commercial corridor and within walking distance of a university. The entrance to the subterranean parking garage is accessed through a single driveway located along the north property line creating an openness of the frontage along Reseda Boulevard and allowing for street trees to be planted along the sidewalk. Though the project seeks a zone and height district change in order to achieve a floor area ratio of 1.89 to 1, the uses proposed are consistent with the policies to reinforce commercial development, grow the economic base, and improve aesthetics. The project has been designed with high quality architectural elements and will maintain and improve the facade with modern designs to create a distinctive mixed-use building that will enhance the architectural diversity of this commercial area. The project is compatible with the adjacent building to the north and mixed-use residential and commercial development mid-block to the southwest and will enhance that development by creating a building of similar size with commercial amenities to go along with the new residences. The project is providing 157 bicycle spaces (136 long-term and 21 short-term) as required. This, combined with the proximity to public transit options, will create a bicycle and pedestrian-friendly environment and encourage residence onsite to use alternative modes of transportation other than auto use.


3. Framework Element. The Framework Element for the General Plan (Framework Element)

was adopted by the City of Los Angeles in December 1996 and re-adopted in August 2001. The Framework Element provides guidance regarding policy issues for the entire City of Los Angeles, including the project site. The Framework Element also sets forth a Citywide comprehensive long-range growth strategy and defines Citywide polices regarding such issues as land use, housing, urban form, neighborhood design, open space, economic development, transportation, infrastructure, and public services. The Framework Element includes the following goals, objectives, and policies relevant to the instant request:

Goal 3A: A physically balanced distribution of land uses that contributes towards and facilitates the City's long-term fiscal and economic viability, revitalization of economically depressed areas, conservation of existing residential neighborhoods, equitable distribution of public resources, conservation of natural resources, provision of adequate infrastructure and public services, reduction of traffic congestion and improvement of air quality, enhancement of recreation and open space opportunities, assurance of environmental justice and a healthful living environment, and achievement of the vision for a more livable city.

Objective 3.4: Encourage new multi-family residential, retail commercial, and office development in the City's neighborhood districts, community, regional, and downtown centers as well as along primary transit corridors/boulevards, while at the same time conserving existing neighborhoods and related districts.

Policy 3.4.1: Conserve existing stable residential neighborhoods and lower-intensity commercial districts and encourage the majority of new commercial and mixed-use (integrated commercial and residential) development to be located (a) in a network of neighborhood districts, community, regional, and downtown centers, (b) in proximity to rail and bus transit stations and corridors, and (c) along the City's major boulevards, referred to as districts, centers, and mixed-use boulevards, in accordance with the Framework Long-Range Land Use Diagram.

The project site is located approximately 330 feet from CSUN’s western campus boundary and along the northern boundary of the Commercial Center (a “Special Boundary” called out in the Community Plan). Therefore, the project is located in an area suitable for commercial development at a higher scale or a mixed-use facility. Further, the project is designed to place an emphasis on the quality of the public realm including the experience of pedestrians by improving the ground floor experience of the site and providing areas open to the public. The project will also promote a pedestrian-friendly environment with active commercial uses at street level. The commercial spaces and open space available to the public are designed to ensure that ground floor commercial uses will benefit from additional connectivity between the project and the neighboring areas and that neighborhood-serving retail will bring convenience to project residents and the community. The character of the area includes mixed-use projects, commercial and retail uses, offices, institutional uses and multiple-family residential. Therefore, the project's intensity and height will be compatible with the existing newer development and will not create negative impacts to the adjacent commercial or residential areas. The Project includes bicycle parking (both long and short term), consistent with the LAMC and California Green Building Code. As such, the project enables a more self-sufficient, pedestrian-oriented lifestyle that will reduce unnecessary vehicle trips in the vicinity and thereby enhance the general welfare. Therefore, the project encourages the appropriate level of growth and increased land use intensity in a growing neighborhood and is near transit nodes and a major employment center (CSUN). The


project will create a pedestrian-oriented environment while promoting an enhanced urban experience with new amenities and opportunities for employment. In the Framework Element, Community Centers are “a focal point for surrounding residential neighborhoods and containing a diversity of uses, Community Centers generally range from floor area ratios of 1.5:1 to 3.0:1, characterized by two- to six-story buildings, e.g., some will be two-story Centers, some four- or six-story Centers depending on the character of the surrounding area”.

The project proposes the construction of approximately 5,725 square feet of commercial uses and a 1,530 square feet leasing office which could be easily be converted into commercial space. Onsite parking for the commercial uses has been adjusted at the request of community through the applicant’s outreach efforts, to allow for a combination of commercial uses such as retail, restaurant, or smaller fitness studio. The flexibility in parking allows for tenant spaces to change if necessary and all the projected parking for higher intensity uses can be accommodated onsite. Further, the project proposes fitness rooms on three of the four residential floors, an open courtyard (southern facing) including a pool, spa and showering cabana, and a passive deck on the fourth floor which are amenities that will attract renters. The commercial uses and paseo area on the ground floor will also draw pedestrians. This balance of uses is designed to meet the needs of local residents, attract visitors, and sustain the economic growth of the area. Specifically, the project advances the above objectives by concentrating commercial uses in an existing transit and commercial corridor. The variety of commercial uses of the project can create job opportunities for local residents and the proposed multiple-family units will assist in the shortage of student housing provided on campus and within the vicinity.

4. The Mobility Element. The Mobility Element (Mobility Plan 2035) of the General Plan is not

likely to be affected by the recommended action herein. Reseda Boulevard is a Boulevard II in the Mobility Element of the General Plan, dedicated to a half right-of-way width of 50 feet and improved with asphalt, roadway, concrete curb, gutters, and a sidewalk. The project will be required to provide a five-foot dedication to increase the sidewalk to the 15-foot width standard per the Bureau of Engineering. The project is also required to comply with all requirements of the Fire Department, Department of Transportation, Urban Forestry Division, and the Bureau of Street Lighting in matters concerning the public right-of-way. Furthermore, the project meets the following goals and objectives of Mobility Plan 2035:

Policy 2.3: Recognize walking as a component of every trip, and ensure high-quality pedestrian access in all site planning and public right-of-way modifications to provide a safe and comfortable walking environment.

Policy 2.10: Facilitate the provision of adequate on and off-street loading areas.

The project’s design, including ground floor treatment will encourage pedestrian activity within a highly active commercial district through pedestrian-friendly design. Furthermore, the project is required to improve Reseda Boulevard through dedication of land to complete a full-width concrete sidewalk with tree wells. Due to the redevelopment of the site, the sidewalk will be increased to a 15-foot width, which benefits residents and patrons of the project as well as pedestrians using Reseda Boulevard

Policy 3.1: Recognize all modes of travel, including pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and vehicular modes - including goods movement - as integral components of the City’s transportation system.


Policy 3.3: Promote equitable land use decisions that result in fewer vehicle trips by providing greater proximity and access to jobs, destinations, and other neighborhood services.

Policy 3.4: Provide all residents, workers and visitors with affordable, efficient,

convenient, and attractive transit services. Policy 3.8: Provide bicyclists with convenient, secure and well-maintained bicycle

parking facilities. The project’s proximity to the existing California State University-Northridge (CSUN) campus just a half-block east of the subject site will reduce vehicular trips for those residents walking or biking to campus. Further, other transit connections will reduce vehicular trips to and from the project site, vehicle miles traveled, and reduce air pollution. There are bus stops located at the northeast and southwest corners of Reseda Boulevard and Plummer Street. The ground floor treatment will encourage pedestrian activity within a highly active commercial component through pedestrian-friendly design. There is a bike lane on both sides of Reseda Boulevard which further south becomes a semi-protected bike lane along the Great Street segment.

Policy 5.4: Continue to encourage the adoption of low and zero emission fuel sources, new mobility technologies, and supporting infrastructure.

As conditioned, a minimum of twenty percent of the parking spaces will be installed with electronic vehicle-ready conduits and five percent of those will be installed. Lastly, the Department of Transportation determined the impact of the trips generated from the project will be less than those of the current post office use.

5. The Sewerage Facilities Element of the General Plan will not be affected by the recommended action. While the sewer system might be able to accommodate the total flows for the proposed project, further detailed gauging and evaluation may be needed as part of the permit process to identify a specific sewer connection point. If the public sewer has insufficient capacity then the developer will be required to build sewer lines to a point in the sewer system with sufficient capacity. A final approval for sewer capacity and connection permit will be made at that time. Ultimately, this sewage flow will be conveyed to the Hyperion Treatment Plant, which has sufficient capacity for the project.

6. Charter Finding – City Charter Finding 555. The General Plan may be amended in its entirety, by subject elements or parts of subject elements, or by geographic areas, provided that the part or area involved has significant social, economic or physical identity. The proposed building will be four stories and approximately 45 feet in height (51 feet 6-inces to the stair tower access); it will contain 127,062 square feet of floor area at a FAR of 1.89 to 1. While the proposed development would be taller and greater in mass than the immediately surrounding commercial buildings, the project would be similar in height to recently completed density bonus condominium projects adjacent to the north, providing a significant physical identity with other structures in the immediate area. Another building nearby that fits the same context is the five-story mixed-use building located at 9423 Reseda Boulevard midblock to the southwest of the project site. Moreover, the post office building and associated surface parking (C2-1VL and RA-1 Zones), which is currently in operation onsite with a lease through 2021, have benefited the community historically as one site since 1960. The proposed plan amendment to Community Commercial and zone change to (T)[Q]RAS4-1VL would provide uniform zoning and development across the project site


consistent with its historical use as one site for commercial purposes. If the floor area were average across the site under the existing land use designations, a greater floor area would be permitted than the total proposed. Further, the proposed height would not differ. As such, the project would maintain the existing physical identity and planned development potential of the surrounding area. The project proposes to provide a minimum 5,725 square feet of commercial space open to the public and 121,337 square feet of floor area associated with the residential space. The increased commercial activity in the area will allow for more employment opportunities, incentivize local spending and activity, stimulate economic growth, create a pedestrian-friendly shopping area and community, and increase convenience for local residents and workers of the neighborhood. The revitalized site will attract the interest of residents, and businesses as the area continues to be revitalized. As such, the project will contribute to and strengthen the economic identity of the surrounding area already within the Community Commercial designation.

7. Charter Finding – City Charter Finding 556. When approving any matter listed in Section

558, the City Planning Commission and the Council shall make findings showing that the action is in substantial conformance with the purposes, intent and provisions of the General Plan. If the Council does not adopt the City Planning Commission’s findings and recommendations, the Council shall make its own findings.

The project site is located within the Northridge Community Plan, which is one of 35 community plans comprising the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The Community Plan designates the project site with the Medium Residential and Community Commercial land use designations, which lists the following corresponding zones: R3, and CR, C2, C4, RAS3, respectively. The site is presently zoned RA-1 (in consistent with the land use designation) and C2-1VL (consistent with the land use designation). As proposed, the amendment would re-designate the northern portion project site from Medium Residential to Community Commercial, extend the Commercial Center “Special Boundary”, and add the RAS4 Zone to be permitted only within the special boundary. The Commercial Center “Special Boundary” is shown on the Northridge Community Plan for commercially zoned properties along both sides of Reseda Boulevard north of Gresham Street and extends to the southern portion of the project site. The requested zone and height district change to (T)[Q]RAS4-1VL for the project site would be consistent with the adoption of the recommended plan amendments. The development of the project represents an opportunity to achieve the overarching goals of the Northridge Community Plan, which include improving the function, design, and economic vitality of the commercial corridors. As such, the proposed amendments would be in substantial conformance with the purpose, intent, and provisions of the General Plan to strengthen the commercial and economic base of the Community Plan area.

8. Charter Finding – City Charter Finding 558. The proposed Amendment to the Northridge

Community Plan will be in conformance with public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice. The proposed amendment to the Northridge Community Plan would re-designate a portion of the project site from Medium Residential to Community Commercial, extend the special boundary and introduce the RAS4 zone within the Commercial Center boundary. These amendments, in conjunction with the requested zone change and height district change to (T)[Q]RAS4-1VL, would allow for the construction of a four-story mixed-use building, approximately 127,062 square-foot, with a proposed FAR of 1.89 to 1.


Public necessity, convenience and general welfare will be better served by adopting the proposed General Plan Amendment and corresponding Zone and Height District Changes, as they would allow the project to provide additional commercial floor area appropriate for the site's location in an area that is located within a half-block of CSUN’s west campus edge. Further, the increased floor area allows the project to better serve the needs of the community by conveniently offering a variety smaller commercial uses and apartments in close proximity to transit and bike lanes. The project includes several recreational amenities on all four floors for its residences and commercial uses which provide enough parking for retail, a restaurant, a coffee shop, and/or fitness studios to activate the sidewalks and capture foot traffic from the nearby bike lane, offices, and other multiple family residential. The increased commercial activity in the area will allow more employment opportunities, incentivize local spending and activity, create a pedestrian-friendly shopping area and community, and increase convenience for local residents and workers of the neighborhood. The revitalized site will attract the interest of student residents and businesses as the area continues to thrive. The additional floor area is also in furtherance of good zoning practice because it will be a better use of the site and will turn it into a focal point for community activity and interaction, improve the general welfare of the community and the City, and improve the design of the existing block while bringing a suite of modern amenities and features. Nationally, the United States Post Office is relaxing long term leases to operate out of smaller tenant spaces within shopping centers. The project is in conformity with public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice because it includes substantial infrastructure improvements and public and common open space. For example, the project will invest in the public realm by including new pedestrian amenities, improved streetscapes, and open space for project residents. The project would demolish an underutilized commercial space and surface parking lot, building up the land to a high intensity mixed-use project. However the infill development is expected to produce less traffic in comparison to the current post office use. Further, the project includes a courtyard open to the south and will include 31 trees on site in addition to street trees to be approved by the Urban Forestry Division of Public Works. These investments in the ground floor experience and common open space for residents use will promote pedestrian and bicycle linkages between the project and institutional uses in the community. In addition to this, the proposed general plan amendments, zone change, and height district change are considered good zoning practice as the sites located directly to the west and south are currently designated Regional Community Commercial. Thus, the requests herein would create consistency within the surrounding area.

Entitlement Findings 9. Vesting Zone Change, L.A.M.C. Sec. 12.32 Q: The recommended vesting zone change

is deemed necessary to protect the best interest of and assure a development more compatible with the surrounding property or neighborhood; to secure an appropriate development in harmony with the objectives of the General Plan; to prevent or mitigate potential adverse environmental affects of the zone change; or that public necessity, convenience or general welfare require that provisions be made for the orderly arrangement of the property concerned into lots and/or that provisions be made for adequate streets, drainage facilities, grading, sewers, utilities and other public dedications and improvement.

As noted in Finding Nos. 1 and 2 above, the project complies with the General Plan Land Use Designation as granted herewith. Furthermore, the project allows the site to secure an appropriate development in harmony with the objectives of the General Plan, by retaining


the General Plan Land Use Designation, keeping a commercial use along the ground floor of a commercial and transit corridor, and by providing a variety of housing options for diverse economic needs in the population. The requested zone change and height district change from RA-1 and C2-1VL to (T)[Q]RAS4-1VL for the construction of a 127,062 square-foot, four-story, 45-foot tall mixed-use development to include 128 residential units (student housing) and 5,725 square feet of ground floor commercial uses, up to 240 subterranean parking spaces, and up to 157 bicycle spaces. The total Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the proposed development is 1.89 to 1. In addition to this, the proposed general plan amendments, zone change, and height district change are considered good zoning practice. Thus, the requests herein would create consistency within the surrounding area with regards to height, bulk, massing and circulation. Further, on December 7, 2016 the project was deemed complete and therefore not subject to Measure JJJ. Zone Change 12.32.C.2: The adoption of the proposed land use ordinance will be in conformity with public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice. Public necessity, convenience and general welfare will be better served by adopting the proposed General Plan Amendments to Community Commercial within Commercial Center which would permit RAS4 within the special boundary and corresponding Zone and Height District Changes, as they would allow the project to provide additional floor area appropriate for the site's location in an area that is transforming with the development of new residential, commercial, and mixed-use land uses. Further, the increased floor area allows the project to better serve the needs of the community by conveniently offering a variety of uses in close proximity to transit and the university. The project includes ample common open space on the second through fourth floors for the residents and for the public where the ground floor commercial area activates the sidewalks and captures foot traffic. The increased commercial activity in the area will allow some employment opportunities, incentivize local spending and activity, create a pedestrian-friendly shopping area and community, and increase convenience for local residents and workers of the neighborhood. The revitalized site will attract the interest of residents, potential investors, and businesses as the area continues to revitalize. The additional floor area is also in furtherance of good zoning practice because it creates one cohesive development that can become a focal point for community activity and interaction, improve the general welfare of the community and the City, bringing a suite of modern amenities and features. The project is in conformity with public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice because it includes substantial infrastructure improvements and public and common open space. For example, the project will invest in the public realm by including new pedestrian amenities, improved streetscapes, and public open space as the building is setback from the sidewalk dedication. The mixed-use project will provide adequate parking spaces to serve the proposed uses, both residential and commercial. These investments in the ground floor experience will promote pedestrian and bicycle linkages between the project, the regional transit system, and the greater community. “T” and “Q” Classification Findings (LAMC 12.32.G and Q). The current action, as recommended, has been made contingent upon compliance with new “T” and “Q” conditions of approval imposed herein for the Proposed Project. Such limitations are necessary to ensure the identified dedications, improvements, and actions are undertaken to meet the public’s needs, convenience, and general welfare served by the required actions. The conditions that limit the scale and scope of future development on the site are also


necessary to protect the best interests of and to assure a development more compatible with surrounding properties and the overall pattern of development in the community, to secure an appropriate development in harmony with the General Plan, and to prevent or mitigate the potential adverse environmental effects of the subject recommended action. The project will provide a five-foot dedication along the Reseda Boulevard frontage to create 15-foot wide sidewalk with street trees, maintenance of the street lighting, and a driveway apron prior to the issuance of any building permits all to be guaranteed by the Bureau of Engineering, Urban Forestry Division of Street Services, Bureau of Street Lighting, Department of Transpiration and the Fire Department through the “T” conditions. The project has also been conditioned through “Q” conditions to for site development, use, density, height and floor area which supports these findings. As such, the project complies with LAMC Section 12.32, C, G and Q for Vesting Zone Changes.

10. Site Plan Review Findings. a. The project is in substantial conformance with the purposes, intent and

provisions of the General Plan, applicable community plan, and any applicable specific plan. The project site is located within the Northridge Community Plan. The adopted Community Plan currently designates the subject property for Medium Residential and Community Commercial land uses, corresponding to the R3, and CR, C2, C4, RAS3 respectively. The site is zoned RA-1 and C2-1VL, which is partly inconsistent with its current land use designations. The applicant has requested a General Plan Amendment to the Community Plan for a portion of the site from Medium Residential to Community Commercial land use designation, to extend the Community Center (Special Boundary) to the north to include the entire site, and to add the RAS4 Zone as a corresponding zone to the Community Center boundary only, and a Zone Change and Height District Change from RA-1 and C2-1VL to (T)[Q]RAS4-1VL. There will be approximately 25,000 cubic yards of dirt to be exported through a haul route. In conjunction with the requests herein, the project would be in substantial conformance with the General Plan as it is reflected within the Northridge Community Plan.

The project improves the existing site by developing a new mixed-use building while maximizing the efficient use of the site by bringing a mix of commercial spaces to the public street frontage. The project is designed to maximize the ground floor of the building with the aforementioned commercial uses and improved streetscape adding to and enhancing the pedestrian experience of the neighborhood. The residential use on the upper levels of the building will much needed housing which will assist in the student housing need created by the University. The entrance to the parking garage is accessed through a one-driveway proposed at the north edge of the site. Though the project seeks a zone change and height district change in order to achieve a floor are ratio of 1.89 to 1, the uses proposed are consistent with the policies to reinforce commercial development, grow the economic base, and improve aesthetics. The project has been designed with high quality architectural elements and will maintain and improve the strong street wall along Reseda Boulevard with modern designs to create a distinctive mixed-use building that will enhance the architectural diversity of this commercial center. The project is compatible with the adjacent building to the north and similar size with mixed-use a block to the southwest at 9423 Reseda Boulevard. However, the detail to the pedestrian area along the street frontage for the project exceeds the design of either comparison, as there is more attention given to this space.


The project provides for approximately 8,138 square feet of private open space and 28,305 square feet of common open space when currently the site provides for none. If the leasing space were to be converted in the future to commercial retail, the common open space calculation would be 26,775 square feet. According to the applicant, only 16,275 square feet of open space is required. Therefore the conversion in the future, if warranted, would not affect the open space requirements. Of the new open space, approximately 4,069 square feet will be landscaped.

The project includes 157 bicycle spaces. Of the bicycle parking, 136 are long term and 21 are short term spaces. This combined with the proximity to public transit options could deter from vehicle trip and create a bicycle and pedestrian-friendly commercial environment.

The condition requiring EV ready parking spaces (installed with chargers) will support the adoption of low and zero emission transportation fuel sources by the project's occupants and visitors. The condition requiring solar panels will support the site's EV chargers and other site electrical uses to help reduce the site's dependence on fossil fuels and carbon generating public utility electrical power. Taken together, these conditions provide for the public welfare and public necessity by reducing the level of pollution or greenhouse gas emissions to the benefit of the neighborhood and City in response to General Plan Health and Wellness Element Policies 5.1 (reduce air pollution), 5.7 (reduce greenhouse gas emissions); Air Quality Element policy 4.2.3 (ensuring new development is compatible with alternative fuel vehicles), 5.1.2 ( shift to non-polluting sources of energy in buildings and operations); Mobility Element Policy 4.1 (expand access to transportation choices) and 5.4 (encourage adoption of low emission fuel sources, new mobility technology and supporting infrastructure). The solar and EV conditions are also good zoning practice because they provide a convenient service amenity to the occupants or visitors who use electric vehicles and utilize electricity on site for other functions. These conditions allow the project to improve the health, wellness, air and mobility of the neighborhood, but within the context of the project's proposed density, uses, and features. Therefore the project is in conformance with the purposes, intent and provisions of the General Plan and Northridge Community Plan.

b. The project consists of an arrangement of buildings and structures (including height, bulk and setbacks), off-street parking facilities, loading areas, lighting, landscaping, trash collection, and other such pertinent improvements that is or will be compatible with existing and future development in neighboring properties. The arrangement of the proposed development is consistent and compatible with existing and future development in neighboring properties. The project site has a frontage of approximately 240.26 feet along Reseda Boulevard and a 290.2 foot depth. The site has an access easement along the eastern property line with the abutting lot on the south. The existing leased post office building on site went through a Historic Resource Assessment and was determined to be ineligible for individual listing under any federal, state and local edibility criterion although listed on SurveyLA. The proposed project involves the demolition of an existing post office building and surface parking lot for the development of a new mixed-use facility. The completed project would consist of a four-story, approximately 45-foot high, 127,062 square-foot, mixed-use development, resulting in 128 residential units and 5,725 square feet of commercial space and two levels of subterranean parking including 240 vehicle spaces and 157 bicycle spaces.


The following project elements were designed in a manner that is compatible with both existing and future development of the surrounding area:

Height/Massing The proposed building will be four stories and approximately 45 feet in height. With the requested zone and height district change to (T)[Q]RAS4-1VL, the project is permitted to be built unlimited 50-foot height, but is limited to an FAR of 3 to 1. The total proposed FAR for the building is 1.89 to 1, consistent with surrounding development. Surrounding uses include a four-story 47-unit apartment building (with four unit set aside for very low income) to the north on the corner in the R3-1 Zone, on the east fronting Halstead Street is a two-story 39-unit apartment building and a three-story 37-unit condominium fronting Plummer Street both in the R3-1 Zone, to the south and across the street to the west are commercial shopping centers with surface parking lots in the C2-1VL and P-1VL Zones, and to the southwest is a three-story office building. Beyond the multiple-family to the east is the California State University, Northridge (CSUN). While the building is taller than older existing commercial and residential development in the immediate area, it is about the same height at the newer apartment building abutting on the north. Building Materials The project employs a distinguishable and attractive building design by utilizing a variety of building materials and distinctive architectural features to add visual interest and to convey both the commercial and residential uses of the building. The first floor frontage is almost all glass allowing for a visible commercial floor. There are vertical elements and repetition of upper floors, yet vertical architectural projections provide interest to the overall façade rhythm. Smaller grid designs infill this framework, evoking a modern feel to the building that complements the first floor, but sets it apart from the remaining levels above.

Setbacks The setbacks applicable to the project are established under LAMC Section 12.11.5. The building frontages will be set back variable widths greater than the required 5-foot minimum as the design allows for open areas to congregate along the west property line. The north elevation is setback 30 feet to allow for ingress and egress compliant with the Department of Transportation’s circulation condition. The rear yard (east elevation) is set back 20 feet to allow for the fire lane. The south elevation is set back 5 feet. Therefore, the proposed setbacks for the project are consistent with the requirements of the LAMC. Parking & Loading Areas The project is required to provide 182 residential parking spaces (51 spaces for less than 3 habitable rooms, 69 spaces for 3 habitable rooms, and 62 for more than 3 habitable rooms) and 23 commercial parking spaces at a ratio of one space per 250 square feet of retail floor area. However, as the commercial tenant have not been selected to date, the applicant would prefer the option of providing commercial parking at a higher rate anticipating that some uses require a ratio of one space per 100 square feet of floor area (i.e. restaurant, gym, coffee shop, etc.). Additionally the applicant is providing one residential long term bicycle stall for each unit (128 total), 13 short-term


residential bicycle spaces, and 16 commercial bicycle spaces (8 short-term and 8 long-term) for a total of 157 bicycle stalls. The vehicular entry driveway has been designed to accommodate the loading area, just past the garage entrance along the north property line. The applicant stated there is an existing easement along the east property with the owners of the property abutting on the south. This is shown as a designated Fire Lane on the Landscape Plan. Lighting & Building Signage Lighting and signage will be provided per LAMC requirements. The project utilizes pedestrian lighting to encourage and extend safe pedestrian activities into the evening. Lighting would be shielded downward and/or away from adjacent uses, including lighting for outdoor terraces. The use of pole-mounted lighting or floodlights is not anticipated, according to the applicant. Project lighting would also include visible interior light emanating from the ground-level commercial uses, architectural lighting to highlight architectural features of the retained portions of the existing building, and decorative lighting within the pedestrian plazas and seating areas. Additionally, the project is conditioned to require outdoor lighting to shine downward, be installed with shielding, and be directed onto the project site, so that the light source does not directly illuminate any adjacent properties or the above night skies. As the parking area is completely within two levels garage, vehicles or their operating headlights are not anticipated to be an illumination concern on adjacent uses. Visual clutter is reduced by placing signs so as not to obscure architectural elements or interfere with building design. Project site signage would include building address identification, commercial retail, wayfinding, and security markings. Commercial Signage is unified across a single horizontal band and building design is such so as to create a cohesive street frontage. As conditioned off-site commercial signage on construction fencing during construction is prohibited. Commercial signage would minimize glare from fixtures to compliment architectural features and reduce the potential for light spillover, and no off-site signage is proposed. Landscaping Open space and landscaping opportunities are utilized on the site in open areas not used for circulation, building, driveways, and parking. The project will add approximately 31,355 square feet of open space (only 16,275 square feet is required of the LAMC) when currently the site provides for no open space. Open space amenities will include 61 private balconies, 32 trees, a courtyard (south facing pool), paseo, roof deck (fourth floor interior and facing the courtyard), plaza, three fitness rooms (first, second, and third floors north of the courtyard), and shower cabana (south of the proposed pool buffering the courtyard from the commercial buildings on the south). The project will also provide landscaping in a ground floor public space and on terraces on higher levels and will add additional street trees to create a pleasant view and provide adequate shade for pedestrians and bike lane uses. Planter boxes on the podium deck have been conditions to be 48-inches in height to allow for development of mature trees which will provide greater shade.

Trash Collection All trash and recycling areas are conditioned to be enclosed and not visible to the public. Trash collection will take place internal to the project site from the driveway on the north side of the site.


As described above, the project consists of an arrangement of buildings and structures (including height, bulk, and setbacks), off-street parking facilities, loading areas, lighting, landscaping, trash collection, and other such pertinent improvements that will be compatible with existing and future development on adjacent and neighboring properties.

c. That any residential project provides recreational and service amenities in order to improve habitability for the residents and minimize impacts on neighboring properties.

The project provides several recreational and service amenities for the residents of the project. The building provides a passive 1,142 square foot deck on the top floor (fourth floor), three recreation rooms on the second through third floor, a 12,215 square foot courtyard which includes a spa, pool, shower cabana, landscaped planters and hardscape, all of which are recreational spaces for the residents. Additionally, about half the units have private balconies (50 square feet each totaling 3,050 square feet). Electronic Vehicle parking spaces will be provided onsite, which provides an opportunity for a reduction of air pollutants and flexibility for parking usage, especially as a future demand for electric vehicles is expected, providing a service amenity for the residents. The neighborhood serving commercial along the frontage of the mixed-use building could also service as an amenity as the building is set back from the sidewalk edge to allow for seating within the public realm. As such, the project provides recreational and service amenities to improve habitability for the residents and to minimize impacts on neighboring properties.

Environmental Findings 11. Environmental Finding. The City of Los Angeles adopted Mitigated Declaration, No. ENV-

2015-3703-MND, prepared for the project, and adopted a Mitigation Monitoring Program, and made all mitigation measures enforceable conditions on the project. The decision-maker found, in its independent judgment, after consideration of the whole of the administrative record, including the Mitigated Negative Declaration, No. ENV-2015-3703-MND, as circulated on January 18, 2018, (“Mitigated Negative Declaration”), and all comments received, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.

12. Flood Insurance. The National Flood Insurance Program rate maps, which are a part of

the Flood Hazard Management Specific Plan adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 172,081, have been reviewed and it has been determined that this project is located in X Zone (Outside the Flood Zone).

Case No. CPC-2015-3702-GPA-VZC-SPR P-1

PUBLIC HEARING AND COMMUNICATIONS

A public hearing on this matter with the Hearing Officer was held at the Marvin Braude San Fernando Valley Constituent Service Center on January 26, 2018. 1. Attendees

The hearing was attended by the applicant, applicant’s representative, members of the development team, a representative from the Neighborhood Council, about five members of the public, and a representative from the Council Office.

2. Oral Testimony a. Mr. David Hilliard, the applicant gave an overview of the project, stating the following:

• The site is approximately 1.5 acres on the east side of Reseda Boulevard. • The United States Post Office has a lease until 2021. • The proposed is for a 128-unit student apartment a block from the CSUN campus

which will help address traffic around the university and provide student housing outside single-family neighborhoods. Surrounding uses include a commercial to the south and west and multiple-family to the north and east and CSUN further east. We are a private enterprise, so this is a market rate mixed-use for rent facility. We look at what student housing is renting for in the area so that we have a sense of our pricing. Generally students stay an average of one year, sometimes two years.

• The original design was for 159-unit proposed with five-stories. We reached out to Council District 12, Northridge Vision, Northridge Camber, and the Neighborhood Council land use and full board as well as abutting property owners to the north and south. Concerns came back regarding the height and lack of parking, so we decreased the height, reducing the proposed density, and provided more parking for the students and guests. We also revised the front entrance per the comments of PVP.

• The floor plans shows front setback is 20-25 feet beyond the curb to create more pedestrian space at the street level. There are four levels of residential units with landscape and recreational facilities. The entrance to the parking is at the north end of the site and there is a large amount of bicycle parking spaces so student are encouraged not to drive to school.

b. Mr. Brad Rosenheim, the applicant’s representative gave an overview of the project entitlements, stating the following:

• The site has split zoning and land use: C2-1VL and RA-1, Community Commercial with Commercial Center Boundary and Medium Residential just north.

• The proposed is for a single unified development as discussion evolved with public outreach with the community and Council Office. The General Plan Amendment for the portion of the site 100 feet to the north changes the Medium Residential land use to Community Commercial including moving the special boundary and allowing for the RAS4 Zone within this boundary. And the zone and height district changes with accompany those entitlements.

• We would like to add to the public record that the 128-unit would be below the 132 units permitted onsite under the current designations and well below the 30,000 square foot maximum floor area ratio of the RAS zone,

• The 1VL height will be consistent with the surrounding, but we request that the projects allowed in 12.21.1 be included in the conditions.


• Further the proposal is for about twice as much open space required per Code and we request it just be conditioned to the Code requirements as we are still in discussions with the Fire Department as it may alter.

• Submitted Northridge East Neighborhood Council Board Meeting meetings from October 19, 2016 to the record.

c. A representative from the Northridge East Neighborhood Council made the following statement:

• The applicant met with a number of the Planning and Land Use committee members several times as well as the full board.

• We appreciated the applicant working with us in thoughtful and interactive ways. They made signification changes to the project so we voted to support the 7,500 square feet of retail with 238 parking spaces.

• We feel the amendments are relatively minor and technical in nature. • CSUN has over 40,000 students. • We support the number of secure bicycle parking spaces and the closeness of this

site to the university will reduce travel time for those that live here as they can walk or ride a bicycle to campus one block to the east. This will reduce parking in our neighborhood. As student housing is added, traffic will be reduced.

• We appreciate this project is going to be built as represented as that did not happen with the project to the north.

• The mixed-use project is compatible with the Great Streets concept along it end just a block to the south.

• We would like the leasing office to be converted to retail/commercial space once the project is fully rented, but we did not condition this in our support letter.

• We contacted the post office and they did not really want to consider a retail operation at this location. They are looking for a full delivery operation for employees and customers. They will be considering other location and we hope that they relocate to somewhere close by.

• CSUN has a bike share program with over 400 bicycles to be taken off campus and left at other locations and then reassigned through a phone application. We would like the applicant to consider locating a parking area in the public right-of-way adjacent to their site. But again, we did not condition this as part of our approval.

d. Two nearby residents, expressed the following concerns about the proposed project and

its impacts on the surrounding neighborhood: • We moved to this area 10 months ago for the access to the Great Street (bike

lanes) and the location near the post office. I am disappointment that the post office is being removed. We do not need any more dining options and proposing such is not warranted. The post office is the best use of that space.

• There is no need for recreational rooms at this proposed student project as there is a wonderful recreational facility on the CSUN campus. Also, student housing should be processed through the university. What if the individual does not pass a class or is not full time? Would you make them move out? Many of these students (about 50%) are on grants and cannot afford expensive student housing. We need more affordable housing. Most families of CSUN student make less than $30,000 a year and it is a commuter school for those living in a short radius.

• I joined the Neighborhood Council shortly after we moved here, but I guess the decision was made prior to my joining.

• There should not be umbrellas on the sidewalk, they should be clear of obstacles.


3. Written Testimony a. Planning staff received four letter of support for the proposed project from Northridge

Vision 2025, Northridge Beatification Foundation, Abundant Housing LA, and a resident.

Northridge Mixed-UseNorthridge, CA

1

PLOT PLAN SUBMITTAL | 02.07.2018

EXHIBIT A

INDEX

DESIGN TEAM

PROJECT DATA

ALTA SURVEY

PLOT PLAN

COMMON OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM

CONTEXT DIAGRAMS

MASSING DIAGRAM

BUILDING PLANS

BUILDING SECTIONS

BUILDING ELEVATIONS

PERSPECTIVES

01020304060910141518

Symphony Development10866 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 225Los Angeles, California 90024Contact: Howard [email protected]

Steinberg Architects523 W Sixth Street #245Los Angeles, California 90014www.steinberghart.comContact: Simon [email protected]

info

+ in

dex


PROJECT ADDRESS: 9546 NORTH RESEDA BOULEVARD, LOS ANGELES, CA 91324 LAMC 12.21.GPROJECT NAME: 9546 RESEDA BOULEVARD

TOTAL OPEN SPACE REQUIRED UNITSLEGAL DESCRIPTION: APN # 276-400-8003 LESS THAN 3 HABITABLE ROOMS 51 100 SF 5,100 SF

APN # 276-400-8018 3 HABITABLE ROOMS 46 125 SF 5,750 SFMORE THAN 3 HABITABLE ROOMS 31 175 SF 5,425 SF

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 4 STORY MIXED-USE BUILDING TOTAL REQUIRED OPEN SPACE 16,275 SF 21,967 SFGROUND LEVEL RETAIL + AMENITY DECK + CLUB HOUSE + DWELLINGSLEVELS 2-3 DWELLINGSLEVEL 4 VIEWING DECK + DWELLINGS 14,667 SF

COURTYARD 12,215 SF

ROOF DECK 1,142 SF

PLAZA 1,310 SFCOMMON OPEN SPACE (AMENITIES) (25% MAX.) 4,250 SF

RAS4 - 8003 28,024 SF 500 SF 27,524 SF 3,275 SF 24,249 SF CLUB HOUSE / FITNESS 2,284 SFRAS4 - 8018 39,304 SF 700 SF 38,604 SF 4,075 SF 34,529 SF LEASING 1,530 SFTOTAL 67,328 SF 1200 SF 66,128 SF 7,350 SF 58,778 SF CABANA 436 SF

TOTAL COMMON OPEN SPACE (50% MIN.) 8,138 SF 18,917 SFDENSITY LOT AREA BEFORE DEDICATIONRAS4 - 8003 400 SF 28,024 SF TOTAL PRIVATE OPEN SPACE UNIT COUNT SF/UNIT ALLOWABLE (SF) PROPOSED SFRAS4 - 8018 400 SF 39,304 SF UNITS W/ BALCONIES 61 50 SF (MAX.) 3,050 SFTOTAL 400 SF 67,328 SF TOTAL PRIVATE OPEN SPACE (50% MAX.) 8,138 3,050 SF

F.A.R. TREE REQUIREMENT UNIT COUNT SF/UNIT REQUIRED PROPOSEDRAS4 - 8003 84,072 SF 56,249 SF 128 32RAS4 - 8018 117,912 SF 70,813 SFTOTAL 201,984 SF 127,062 SF

UNIT TYPE RAS4 RAS4 TOTAL %STUDIO 490 SF 0 51 51 40% RETAIL SF 5,725 SF1 BEDROOM 735 SF 4 42 46 36%2 BEDROOM 986 SF 16 0 16 13%3 BEDROOM 1,270 SF 4 0 4 3%4 BEDROOM 1,721 SF 11 0 11 9%TOTAL 35 93 128 100%

UNITS RATIO REQUIRED PROPOSED

51 1 5146 1.5 6931 2 62

RESIDENTIAL 128 182 185450 SF 1:250 SF 2 2

5,275 SF 1:100 SF 53 53237 240

BICYCLE STALL REQUIREMENTSVARIABLE RATIO REQUIRED PROPOSED

128 units 1.00 128 128128 units 0.10 13 13

5,725 sf 1 / 2000 3 115,725 sf 1 / 2000 3 11

TOTAL LONG-TERM STALLS 131 139TOTAL SHORT TERM STALLS 16 24TOTAL BICYCLE STALLS 147 163

LESS THAN 3 HABITABLE ROOMS3 HABITABLE ROOMS

3.00 2.013.00 1.80

UNIT MIX AND RETAIL SUMMARYAVERAGE SF RETAIL SF

PARKING STALL REQUIREMENTS W/O REDUCTION

3.00 1.89

RESIDENTIAL LONG TERMRESIDENTIAL SHORT TERMCOMMERCIAL LONG TERMCOMMERCIAL SHORT TERM

MORE THAN 3 HABITABLE ROOMS

COMMERCIAL - RESTAURANTTOTAL PARKING STALLS

COMMERCIAL - GENERAL RETAIL

98 93168 128

ALLOWABLE F.A.R. PROPOSED F.A.R. ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA PROPOSED FLOOR AREA

SF/UNIT UNITS ALLOWED UNITS PROPOSED70 35

9546 RESEDA BOULEVARD

PROJECT SUMMARY

ZONING DEDICATIONBEFORE DEDICATION AFTER DEDICATION REQUIRED SETBACK BUILDABLE AREA

PROJECT DATA

COMMON OPEN SPACE REQUIREDCOMMON OPEN SPACE (OPEN TO SKY)

OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS

SF / UNIT REQUIRED PROPOSED

TREE COUNT 1 TREE : 4 UNITS 32

PROPOSED REQUIRED (SF) PROPOSED (SF)

1


TO BE DEMOLISHED -

2


PLOT PLAN

PROJECT ADDRESS: 9546 NORTH RESEDA BOULEVARD, LOS ANGELES, CA 91324 LAMPROJECT NAME: 9546 RESEDA BOULEVARD

TOTLEGAL DESCRIPTION: APN # 276-400-8003 LES

APN # 276-400-8018 3 HAMOR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 4 STORY MIXED-USE BUILDING TOTGROUND LEVEL RETAIL + AMENITY DECK + CLUB HOUSE + DWELLINGSLEVELS 2-3 DWELLINGSLEVEL 4 VIEWING DECK + DWELLINGS

RAS4 - 8003 28,024 SF 500 SF 27,524 SF 3,275 SF 24,249 SFRAS4 - 8018 39,304 SF 700 SF 38,604 SF 4,075 SF 34,529 SFTOTAL 67,328 SF 1200 SF 66,128 SF 7,350 SF 58,778 SF

DENSITY LOT AREA BEFORE DEDICATIONRAS4 - 8003 400 SF 28,024 SFRAS4 - 8018 400 SF 39,304 SF TOTTOTAL 400 SF 67,328 SF UNI

F.A.R.RAS4 - 8003 84,072 SF 56,249 SFRAS4 - 8018 117,912 SF 70,813 SFTOTAL 201,984 SF 127,062 SF

UNIT TYPE RAS4 RAS4 TOTAL %STUDIO 490 SF 0 51 51 40% RETAIL SF 5,725 SF1 BEDROOM 735 SF 4 42 46 36%2 BEDROOM 986 SF 16 0 16 13%3 BEDROOM 1,270 SF 4 0 4 3%4 BEDROOM 1,721 SF 11 0 11 9%TOTAL 35 93 128 100%

UNITS RATIO REQUIRED PROPOSED51 1 5146 1.5 6931 2 62

RESIDENTIAL 128 182 1855,715 SF 1:250 SF 23 53

205 238

STALLS REQ. REDUCTION REQUIRED PROPOSEDRESIDENTIAL 182 10% 164 185COMMERCIAL 23 20% 19 53

183 238

BICYCLE STALL REQUIREMENTSUNITS RATIO REQUIRED PROPOSED

128 1.00 128 128128 0.10 13 13

4 AUTO STALLS 2:1 8 84 AUTO STALLS 2:1 8 8

TOTAL LONG-TERM STALLS 136 136TOTAL SHORT TERM STALLS 21 21TOTAL BICYCLE STALLS 157 157

LESS THAN 3 HABITABLE ROOMS3 HABITABLE ROOMS

3.00 2.013.00 1.80

UNIT MIX AND RETAIL SUMMARYAVERAGE SF RETAIL SF

PARKING STALL REQUIREMENTS W/O REDUCTION

3.00 1.89

RESIDENTIAL LONG TERMRESIDENTIAL SHORT TERMCOMMERCIAL LONG TERMCOMMERCIAL SHORT TERM

MORE THAN 3 HABITABLE ROOMS

COMMERCIALTOTAL PARKING STALLS

PARKING STALL REQUIREMENTS W/ REDUCTIONLAMC 12.21.A.4 - PER BICYCLE PARKING ORDINANCE

TOTAL PARKING STALLS

98 93168 128

ALLOWABLE F.A.R. PROPOSED F.A.R. ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA PROPOSED FLOOR AREA

SF/UNIT UNITS ALLOWED UNITS PROPOSED70 35

9546 RESEDA BOULEVARD

PROJECT SUMMARY

ZONING DEDICATIONBEFORE DEDICATION AFTER DEDICATION REQUIRED SETBACK BUILDABLE AREA

PROJECT DATA

COMCOM

OP

COM

TRETRE

0' 15' 30' 45' 60'

scale : 1" = 30'

N

02.07.2018

33


LEVEL 1 COMMON OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM

RES

EDA

BLV

D

COURTYARD12,215 SF

PLAZA1,310 SF

LEASING1,530 SF

CABANA436 SF

CLUB HOUSE2,284 SF

0' 15' 30' 45' 60'

scale : 1" = 30'

N

02.07.2018

44

GROUND FLOOR OPEN SPACE

COMMON OPEN SPACE (OPEN TO SKY)- 14,667 SFPRIVATE OPEN SPACE - 3,050 SFCOMMON OPEN SPACE (AMENITIES) - 4,250 SF


RES

EDA

BLV

D

ROOF DECK1,142 SF

LEVEL 4 COMMON OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM

0' 15' 30' 45' 60'

scale : 1" = 30'

N

02.07.2018

55

GROUND FLOOR OPEN SPACE

COMMON OPEN SPACE (OPEN TO SKY)- 14,667 SFPRIVATE OPEN SPACE - 3,050 SFCOMMON OPEN SPACE (AMENITIES) - 4,250 SF


EXISTING CONTEXT

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

2/3 STORYMFH

2 STORYMFH

3 STORYMFH

2/3 STORYMFH

2/4 STORYMFH

3 STORYMFH

5 STORYMFH

2 STORYMFH

2 STORYMFH

3 STORYMFH

2 STORYMFH2/4 STORY

MFH

2 STORYMFH

2 STORYMFH

2 STORYMFH

2 STORYMFH

2 STORYMFH

3 STORYMFH

3 STORYMFH

SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING

SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING

SCHOOL

COMMERCIAL &RETAIL

COMMERCIAL &RETAIL

CHURCHCOMMERCIAL &

RETAIL

N

SITE

RESEDA BLVD

ETIWANDA AVE

PLUMMER ST

VINCENNES ST

6


DISTANT VIEWS

LIMITED VIEWSLEVELS 3-4

VIEWLEVELS 1-4

N

7


VEHICLE CIRCULATION PRIMARY CIRCULATION

SECONDARY CIRCULATION

TERTIARY CIRCULATION

SITE

N

RESE

DA

BLVD

PLUMMER ST

HALSTED ST

CITRONIA ST

8


LEASING

UNITS

PARKING

UNITS

MEDIUM

RETAIL

INTERIOR FACE

EXTERIOR FACEEXTERIOR FACE

EXTERIOR FACE

PUBLIC

PRIVATE

FRONT OF EXTERIOR UNITSIDE OF EXTERIOR UNITFRONT OF INTERIOR UNITSIDE OF INTERIOR UNITBACKSIDE

AA1BB1C

A

A

A

A1

A1

B

B1

C

C

B

B

X-LARGE

SMALL

PUBLIC/OUT

PUBLIC/OUT

PRIVATE/IN

PRIVATE/IN

PRIVATE/IN

CONVERGENCEPOINT

CIRCULATION

MASSING DIAGRAMS

1 2 3

INTERIOR OPEN SPACE

EXTERIOR OPEN SPACE

4 5 6

7 8 9

9


RES

EDA

BLV

D

LEVEL 1

PLAN SUMMARY

LEASINGRETAILCLUB ROOM/FITNESSDWELLING UNITS

1,530 SF5,725 SF1,142 SF26

0' 15' 30' 45' 60'

scale : 1" = 30'

N

02.07.2018

1010


COURT BELOW

RES

EDA

BLV

D

LEVEL 2-4

PLAN SUMMARY

CLUB ROOM/FITNESSDWELLING UNITS

1,142 SF34

0' 15' 30' 45' 60'

scale : 1" = 30'

N

02.07.2018

1111


ROOF LEVEL

PLAN SUMMARY

SOLAR READY P.V. ZONE (15% OF ROOF SF)CONDENSER UNITS

5,000 SF

128

COURT BELOW

ROOF

SOLAR READY ZONE2,500 SF

CON

DEN

SER UN

ITS

CONDENSER UNITS

CON

DEN

SER UN

ITS

BOILER

SOLAR READY ZONE2,500 SF

RES

EDA

BLV

D

0' 15' 30' 45' 60'

scale : 1" = 30'

N

02.07.2018

1212


LEVEL P1

PARKING SUMMARY

AUTOMOBILE

RESIDENTIALSTANDARDCOMPACTTANDEME.V. INSTALLEDE.V. READYSUBTOTAL

RETAILSTANDARDCOMPACTTANDEME.V. INSTALLEDE.V. READYCLEAN AIRSUBTOTAL

TOTAL

BICYCLE

RESIDENTIALRETAILTOTAL

1951061656

3514-23155111

1288136

0' 15' 30' 45' 60'

scale : 1" = 30'

N

02.07.2018

1313


LEVEL P2

PARKING SUMMARY

AUTOMOBILE

RESIDENTIALSTANDARDCOMPACTTANDEME.V. INSTALLEDE.V. READYSUBTOTAL

TOTAL

761814516129129

0' 15' 30' 45' 60'

scale : 1" = 30'

N

02.07.2018

1414


PARKING

PARKING

POOL

UNIT B

UNIT B

UNIT A

UNIT A

UNIT B

UNIT B

UNIT A

UNIT A

PARKING

PARKING

SPA POOL

UNIT C

UNIT C

UTILITY

CLUBROOM

FITNESS

RETAIL

SECTION BSCALE 1/16” = 1’-0”

SECTION ASCALE 1/16” = 1’-0”

UNIT C

UNIT CROOF DECK

A

A

B

B

PARKING

PARKING

UNIT B UNIT B UNIT A

CLUBROOM

SHCA

PARKING

PARKING

POOL

UNIT B

UNIT B

UNIT B

UNIT A

UNIT A

UNIT A

UNIT B

UNIT B

UNIT B

UNIT A

UNIT A

UNIT AROOF DECK

PARKING

PARKING

SPA POOL

UNIT C

UNIT C

UTILITY

CLUBROOM

FITNESS

RETAIL

SECTION BSCALE 1/16” = 1’-0”

SECTION ASCALE 1/16” = 1’-0”

UNIT C

UNIT CROOF DECK

A

A

B

B

PARKING

PARKING

UNIT B UNIT B UNIT A

CLUBROOM

SHOWERCABANA

15


0' 10' 20' 30' 40'

scale : 1" = 20' 02.07.2018

West Elevation

PL PL

1616


0' 10' 20' 30' 40'

scale : 1" = 20'

PL PL

02.07.2018

South Elevation

RESEDA BLVD.

1717


0' 10' 20' 30' 40'

scale : 1" = 20' 02.07.2018

East Elevation

PL PL

1818


0' 10' 20' 30' 40'

scale : 1" = 20' 02.07.2018

North Elevation

RESEDA BLVD.

PL PL

1919


Perspective Looking East

20


Perspective from Northwest Corner

21


Street View Perspective Looking South

22


Street View Perspective Looking North

23

100 \.. 1-''4......---------E~Xl:i I BIT 8 bJ 0 SUPERIOR ..

Q

~ m C H R C H

_J 54 "---------------:::-;;;;i---t-----""t1--0 U)

9.

CITRONIA

@ ~@ 1 __

~-=~IY -- :

I I I ti) I -~I

$ I

R3-1

@

I I I

@: I

•1 I I

(T)(Q)C2-1 VL ~---·- ·- ·-·-·- ·-·-·-·-·-·-· P-1VL . 10 • • C2-1VL SHOPPING CENTER

: 5. I I

' r·-·-·-·-·1. ! ::= ·-·-·-·-· I • »-j ! P-1VL

: R3-1 -~----c=2,..........,1=v=L..---~ I L_ . .:: ___ .:i ii~ I ,-·-·-·-·-·-· - · - · ,

: i C2-1VL i I ! ornct BUILDING ! I 1..--·- ·-·- ·- ·-·-•.I :@

R3 1 l

100

100

102

Q ...., Cl) ...., ct:: 100 102

16. ij

R3-1 15· 14.

R3-1

:i! HALSTED

23.

SHOPPING CENlER .,_ __ _________ j

PARKING P-1VL - -- ---,

20. I r ·, C2-1VL 1 is! i ,._1 !1!

OIL CHANGE I INI I · U · ! L.:..J

., : ! i »l .. C2-1'4. ·-·, r·-·,

. -I· PARKING I j PHARMACY !>! 11~1 i 1 .-1

1 i: i=lt"" i I i i C2-1'4. ! ~ ! 34. I !

I 33.

C2-1VL i lb! P-1VL ! AUTO CLUB ! PARKING L-·-·-·-·-·.J

RA-1

17.

56

19. 22.

24.

31. 32.

~ ~ ST ~

...., ~

0 54

ST ~

JO.

I I I

{

I

I I I I I I I I

I

GE : I I I I

111nii:-

I I

1- "".1 I

I I I

IS CEN"TER I I

_ I _ _ __ I ___ , ,._ - ·

I I

ST ~

-: t- - !--- !----! .. I ¢.S.U.N. COl.LEGE I I I I I I I I I I I I I PF-1XL I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

'!... '\. } i' '} I I I I I I I I I JO. I

__ j_.L_ _L __ _j_ - - -

NET AC. = 1.60 ~ REQUESTED: RA-1 AND C2-1VL TO (O]RAS4-1

LEGAL: POR. LOT 45, TRACT No. 2334, /\NO POR. LOT 1, TRACT No. 24409, SEE APPLICATION

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT THOMAS BROS. WITH ZONE CHANGE CASE NO.:

PAGE: 500 DATE: J 16 16 10 - l<:, - t7

GRID: J/6 DRAWN BY: ANDRES RAAB D.M. NO.: 201 B 125

C.D. 12 .ONTINENTAL MAPPING SERVICE SCALE: 1" = 100· C.T. 1152.01 6315 Van Nuys Boulevard# 208, Van Nuys, CA 91401 USES: FIELD P.A. 220 Phone: (818) 787-1663 - Fax: (818) 787-1321 CONTACT PERSON: HOWARD KOZLOFF

'-CAIJJLE: BATOi-RWA-RAO 310-663-3534 CMS 16-6914

SEE W A4 I l DWlSH ST 2CRAGGYV1DIST J JOWi ST

\

'

p~l~lf

\ \

', \ I I I 1

~,:·-\ ,I':;: .l

I

§

ST 20300

MAP ~ , CORI SCO ST

-~,:--t:;:; z ~,8 ~ ;;

<l I o

,·,1 '0900

t-f',Z,,J II ~ I/ -,i I I r=J"- 1- - - -

2040-0- - --I SUNBURST I '<

'< I,

111

~ ~I~ ii'

S:~s1II~ NO;bHOF;:-i~

I TIW4fSPL lK( NlW'I' JCJJHEldlURf DA 40XfORO'rN SOOIICHCSl(ROR 6 Kl.YfAUIPL

r.·m

0 Single Family Dwelling

@ Number of dwelling units

.6. Non residential structure

0

"' CITRONIA

@ @ I

100

Ci ~ m

@

100

g SUPERIOR ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . :•: •:.: •:•:.: •:.: •:•:. :•: ............ ·····•·········•·······•· •+•+•+•+•+•+•+•+•++c .H. R C H :•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•: .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . @

61 - -"\.-

g HALSTED

@

l 0 54

VN:NIT

ST g

fS.U.N.Clll.EG£! I

I .A.I I I I I I I I I 1-'tj

I

~

@

.:

@ I II II

)' )1 11 _L_JJ

EXISTING Northridge Community Plan 100· 0 100, • 20, o· 300·

I ' I D RA Very Low I o c2 Community Commercial

D R3 Medium D Neighborhood Commercial

~g-5 Low Medium II D PF Public Facilities

CPC

.ONTINENTAL MAPPING SERVICE 6315 Van Nuys Boulevard# 208, Van Nuys, CA 91401

Phone: (818) 787-1663- Fax: (818) 787-1321

DATE: 3-lb-llo

0 Single Family Dwelling

@ Number of dwelling units

A Non residential structure

@ @ I I I I I

100

Q

~ m

@

100

0 SUPERIOR .,

••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••• : : : : : : : ::: : : : : : : : : : : : : : :: : :•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•~ :H: ••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••• : . :•:.:. :•:.:.:.:.: •:.:.

@

w- __._,__

:il HALSTED

R C H

•

i ~ST~

0 54

I "

I I I

I

~

'r' r

ST iii

1--__._...,___,__ e-!_ _u

REQUESTED Northridge Community Plan 1 oo· 0 1 o, o· 20, o· 300· I I I

D RA Very Low

-

c2 Community Commercial RAS4

D R3 Medium LJPF Publ ic Facilities

:::::::: ~~1·5 Low Medium 11

CPC

• ONTINENTAL MAPPING SERVICE 6315 Van Nuys Boulevard# 208, Van Nuys, CA 91401

Phone: (818) 787-1663 - Fax: (818) 787-1321

DATE: 3-16-16

2015-3702

0 m

9.

(T)(Q)c2:,.1VL __ P-1'{1. _

5.

I I R3-1

I I@

0 ~ m

@

100

7. 8.

R3-1 @

C2-1VL SHOPPING C[NlER s l - tr r. . i

P-1VL

100

100 102

EXISTING ZONING

:.i SUPERIOR

@

R3-1 15.

-@;- -.....- -

:g HALSTED

20.

C2-1VL . OB.. CHANGE I,

P-1VL PAROIG

100·

RA-1

0 I

31.

24.

G£ I I I I

JO. -~

I Pf'"'1 XL I

1 p_ ~

I s.u. CW£

ST :.i

ST i.i

11 I I II

! I Pt-1xl II

{} t { ): ! 1 I JO. _J_ _JJ

I 300'

I - -- -Requested: RA-1 & C2-1 VL TO [ O]RAS4-1 L. - ONTINENTAL MAPPING SERVICE

• 6315 Van Nuys Boulevard# 208, Van Nuys, CA 91401

Phone: (818) 787-1663 - Fax: (818) 787-1321 Subject Property

Tentative Zoning Boundary (T or Q) DATE: 3-lb-/b

t . p'j

EXHIBIT C ;

CITY OF LOS ANGELES ;

OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK ROOM 395, CITY HALL

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT

PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION -LEAD CITY AGENCY COUNCIL DISTRICT City of Los Angeles CD 12 - MITCHELL ENGLANDER

--PROJECT TITLE CASE NO.

f ENV-2015~3703-MND . CPC-2015-3702-GPA-VZC-SPR ' - -

PROJECT LOCATION 9530, 9534 & 9546 N. Reseda Boulevard

PROJECT DESCRIPTION The demolition of an existing 26,000 square-foot one-story Post Office, surface parking lot and landscaping for the proposed construction of a 127,062 square-foot, four-story, 45-foot tall mixed-use development to include 128 residential units (student housing) and 5,725 square feet of ground floor commercial uses, up to 205 subterranean parking spaces, and up to 157 bicycle spaces. There will be approximately 25,000 cubic yards of dirt to be exported through a haul route.

A General Plan Amendment to the Northridge Community Plan to extend the Community Commercial Land Use designation and Community Center (Special Boundary) 100 feet north at 9546 N. Reseda Boulevard, and to add the RAS4 Zone as a corresponding

. zone to the Community Commercial Land Use designation within the Community Center boundary; a Vesting Zone and Height District Change from C2-1VL and RA-1 to (T)(Q)RAS4-1VL to limit the height, floor area, and density to align with the context and design standards of the neighborhood; and, a Site Plan Review (SPR) to allow a unified project for a project which results in an increase of more than 50 dwelling units or guest rooms.

- - - "

NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT IF OTHER THAN CITY AGENCY Symphony Northridge LLC 11828 La Grange Avenue, Suite 225 Los Angeles, CA 90025

FINDING: The City Planning Department of the City of Los Angeles has Proposed that a mitigated negative declaration be adopted for this project because the mitigation measure(s) outlined on the attached page(s) will reduce any potential significant adverse effects to a level of insignificance

I

(CONTINUED ON PAGE 2) ~, -SEE ATTACHED SHEET(S) FOR ANY MITIGATION MEASURES IMPOSED.

Any written comments received during the public review period are attached together with the response of the Lead City Agency. The project decision-make may adopt the mitigated negative declariation, amend it, or require preparation of an EIR. Any changes made should be supported by substantial evidence in the record and appropriate findings made.

=J THE INITIAL STUDY PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT IS ATTACHED. - ·- -- - ~-- --· - --r AME OF PERSON PREPARING THIS FORM ITITLE iTELEPHONE NUMBER !

I

(c ity Planner Jis1s) 37~~917_ t>ARAH HOUNSELL - -· -- - - · - _ ,

ADDRESS , SIGNATURE (Official) DATE

~ 'ff · 02/07/2018 I -200 N. SPRING STREET, 7th FLOOR! ~ ;}ft

l LOS ANGELES , CA. 90012 , -

~

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 1 of 35

IV-20. Habitat Modification (Nesting Native Birds, Non-Hillside or Urban Areas)

The project will result in the removal of vegetation and disturbances to the ground and therefore may result in takeof nesting native bird species. Migratory nongame native bird species are protected by international treaty underthe Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (50 C.F.R Section 10.13). Sections 3503, 3503.5 and 3513of the California Fish and Game Code prohibit take of all birds and their active nests including raptors and othermigratory nongame birds (as listed under the Federal MBTA).

Proposed project activities (including disturbances to native and non-native vegetation, structures and substrates)should take place outside of the breeding bird season which generally runs from March 1- August 31 (as early asFebruary 1 for raptors) to avoid take (including disturbances which would cause abandonment of active nestscontaining eggs and/or young). Take means to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue,catch, capture or kill (Fish and Game Code Section 86).

If project activities cannot feasibly avoid the breeding bird season, beginning thirty days prior to the disturbance ofsuitable nesting habitat, the applicant shall:

Arrange for weekly bird surveys to detect any protected native birds in the habitat to be removed and any othersuch habitat within properties adjacent to the project site, as access to adjacent areas allows. The surveys shallbe conducted by a qualified biologist with experience in conducting breeding bird surveys. The surveys shallcontinue on a weekly basis with the last survey being conducted no more than 3 days prior to the initiation ofclearance/construction work.

If a protected native bird is found, the applicant shall delay all clearance/construction disturbance activities within300 feet of suitable nesting habitat for the observed protected bird species until August 31.

Alternatively, the Qualified Biologist could continue the surveys in order to locate any nests. If an active nest islocated, clearing and construction within 300 feet of the nest or as determined by a qualified biological monitor,shall be postponed until the nest is vacated and juveniles have fledged and when there is no evidence of asecond attempt at nesting. The buffer zone from the nest shall be established in the field with flagging and stakes.Construction personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of the area.

The applicant shall record the results of the recommended protective measures described above to documentcompliance with applicable State and Federal laws pertaining to the protection of native birds. Such record shallbe submitted and received into the case file for the associated discretionary action permitting the project.

IV-70. Tree Removal (Non-Protected Trees)

Environmental impacts from project implementation may result due to the loss of significant trees on the site.However, the potential impacts will be mitigated to a less than significant level by the following measures:

Prior to the issuance of any permit, a plot plan shall be prepared indicating the location, size, type, and generalcondition of all existing trees on the site and within the adjacent public right(s)-of-way.

Removal or planting of any tree in the public right-of-way requires approval of the Board of Public Works. ContactUrban Forestry Division at: 213-847-3077. All trees in the public right-of-way shall be provided per the currentstandards of the Urban Forestry Division, Bureau of Street Services, Department of Public Works.

V-50. Cultural/Historic Resources

The project will result in an impact on identified cultural/historical resources. However, the impact can be reducedto a less than significant level though compliance with the following measure(s):

If archaeological resources are discovered during excavation, grading, or construction activities, work shall ceasein the area of the find until a qualified archaeologist has evaluated the find in accordance with federal, State, andlocal guidelines, including those set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. Per regulatorycompliance measures, Ppersonnel of the proposed Modified Project shall not collect or move any archaeologicalmaterials and associated materials. Construction activity may continue unimpeded on other portions of the Projectsite. The found deposits would be treated in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines, including thoseset forth in California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. Therefore, the impact would be less thansignificant.

VI-40. Grading (20,000 Cubic Yards, or 60,000 Square Feet of Surface Area or Greater)

Impacts will result from the alteration of natural landforms due to extensive grading activities. However, this impactwill be mitigated to a less than significant level by designing the grading plan to conform with the City's LandformGrading Manual guidelines, subject to approval by the Department of City Planning and the Department ofBuilding and Safety's Grading Division. Chapter IX, Division 70 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code addressesgrading, excavations, and fills. All grading activities require grading permits from the Department of Building andSafety. Additional provisions are required for grading activities within Hillside areas. The application of BMPsincludes but is not limited to the following mitigation measures:


MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIONENV-2015-3703-MND

A deputy grading inspector shall be on-site during grading operations, at the owner’s expense, to verifycompliance with these conditions. The deputy inspector shall report weekly to the Department of Building andSafety (LADBS); however, they shall immediately notify LADBS if any conditions are violated.

“Silt fencing” supported by hay bales and/or sand bags shall be installed based upon the final evaluation andapproval of the deputy inspector to minimize water and/or soil from going through the chain link fencing potentiallyresulting in silt washing off-site and creating mud accumulation impacts.

“Orange fencing” shall not be permitted as a protective barrier from the secondary impacts normally associatedwith grading activities.

Movement and removal of approved fencing shall not occur without prior approval by LADBS.XII-20. Increased Noise Levels (Demolition, Grading, and Construction Activities)

Construction and demolition shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday, and8:00 am to 6:00 pm on Saturday.

Demolition and construction activities shall be scheduled so as to avoid operating several pieces of equipmentsimultaneously, which causes high noise levels.

The project contractor shall use power construction equipment with state-of-the-art noise shielding and mufflingdevices.

The construction contractor shall use on-site electrical sources or solar generators to power equipment rather thandiesel generators where feasible.

XII-60. Increased Noise Levels (Mixed-Use Development)

Environmental impacts to proposed on-site residential uses from noises generated by proposed on-sitecommercial uses may result from project implementation. However, the potential impact will be mitigated to a lessthan significant level by the following measure:

Wall and floor-ceiling assemblies separating commercial tenant spaces, residential units, and public places, shallhave a Sound Transmission Class (STC) value of at least 50, as determined in accordance with ASTM E90 andASTM E413.

XII-170. Severe Noise Levels (Residential Fronting on Major or Secondary Highway, or adjacent to a Freeway)

Environmental impacts to future occupants may result from this project's implementation due to mobile noise.However, these impacts will be mitigated to a less than significant level by the following measures:

All exterior windows having a line of sight of a Major or Secondary Highway shall be constructed with double-paneglass and use exterior wall construction which provides a Sound Transmission Class (STC) value of 50, asdetermined in accordance with ASTM E90 and ASTM E413, or any amendment thereto.

The applicant, as an alternative, may retain an acoustical engineer to submit evidence, along with the applicationfor a building permit, any alternative means of sound insulation sufficient to mitigate interior noise levels below aCNEL of 45 dBA in any habitable room.

XVI-80. Transportation/Traffic

The project will result in impacts to transportation and/or traffic systems. However, the impact can be reduced to aless than significant level though compliance with the following measure(s):

Applicant shall plan construction and construction staging as to maintain pedestrian access on adjacent sidewalksthroughout all construction phases. This requires the applicant to maintain adequate and safe pedestrianprotection, including physical separation (including utilization of barriers such as K-Rails or scaffolding, etc.) fromwork space and vehicular traffic and overhead protection, due to sidewalk closure or blockage, at all times.

Temporary pedestrian facilities should be adjacent to the project site and provide safe, accessible routes thatreplicate as nearly as practical the most desirable characteristics of the existing facility.

Covered walkways shall be provided where pedestrians are exposed to potential injury from falling objects.

Applicant shall keep sidewalk open during construction until only when it is absolutely required to close or blocksidewalk for construction staging. Sidewalk shall be reopened as soon as reasonably feasible taking constructionand construction staging into account.


MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIONENV-2015-3703-MND

CITY OF LOS ANGELES OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK

ROOM 395, CITY HALLLOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT INITIAL STUDY

and CHECKLIST (CEQA Guidelines Section 15063)

LEAD CITY AGENCY:City of Los Angeles

COUNCIL DISTRICT:CD 12 - MITCHELL ENGLANDER

DATE:11/20/2017

RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES: Department of City Planning

ENVIRONMENTAL CASE:ENV-2015-3703-MND

RELATED CASES:CPC-2015-3702-GPA-VZC-SPR

PREVIOUS ACTIONS CASE NO.: Does have significant changes from previous actions. Does NOT have significant changes from previous actions

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:MIXED-USE BUILDING WITH 128 APTS, STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL AND SUBTERRANEAN PARKING ENV PROJECT DESCRIPTION:The demolition of an existing 26,000 square-foot one-story Post Office, surface parking lot and landscaping for the proposedconstruction of a 127,062 square-foot, four-story, 45-foot tall mixed-use development to include 128 residential units (student housing)and 5,725 square feet of ground floor commercial uses, up to 205 subterranean parking spaces, and up to 157 bicycle spaces. Therewill be approximately 25,000 cubic yards of dirt to be exported through a haul route.

A General Plan Amendment to the Northridge Community Plan to extend the Community Commercial Land Use designation andCommunity Center (Special Boundary) 100 feet north at 9546 N. Reseda Boulevard, and to add the RAS4 Zone as a correspondingzone to the Community Commercial Land Use designation within the Community Center boundary; a Vesting Zone and Height DistrictChange from C2-1VL and RA-1 to (T)(Q)RAS4-1VL to limit the height, floor area, and density to align with the context and designstandards of the neighborhood; and, a Site Plan Review (SPR) to allow a unified project for a project which results in an increase ofmore than 50 dwelling units or guest rooms. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTINGS:The subject site is comprised of two parcel, one parcel south of Halsted Street, on the east side of Reseda Boulevard. Surroundinguses include a four-story 47-unit apartment building (with four unit set aside for very low income) to the north on the corner in theR3-1 Zone, on the east fronting Halstead Street is a two-story 39-unit apartment building and a three-story 37-unit condominiumfronting Plummer Street both in the R3-1 Zone, to the south and across the street to the west are commercial shopping centers withsurface parking lots in the C2-1VL and P-1VL Zones, and to the southwest is a three-story office building. Beyond the multiple-familyto the east is the California State University, Northridge (CSUN). PROJECT LOCATION:9530, 9534 & 9546 N. Reseda Boulevard

COMMUNITY PLAN AREA: NORTHRIDGE STATUS:

Does Conform to Plan

Does NOT Conform to Plan

AREA PLANNING COMMISSION: NORTH VALLEY

CERTIFIED NEIGHBORHOODCOUNCIL: NORTHRIDGE EAST

EXISTING ZONING: C2-1VL & RA-1

MAX. DENSITY/INTENSITYALLOWED BY ZONING: 97-units (1.5:1 FAR); 1 SFD

LA River Adjacent:

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL

MAX. DENSITY/INTENSITYALLOWED BY PLANDESIGNATION: 97-units (1.5:1 FAR); 35-units (3:1FAR)


PROPOSED PROJECT DENSITY: 5,725 sq ft retail & 128-units (1.89FAR)


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 NEGATIVEDECLARATION 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 projectproponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTREPORT 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 documentpursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on earlieranalysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it mustanalyze 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 potentiallysignificant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant toapplicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVEDECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothingfurther is required.

City Planner (818) 374-9917

Signature Title Phone

Evaluation Of Environmental Impacts:

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

2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well asproject-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 indicatewhether the impact is potentially significant, less that significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially SignificantImpact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "PotentiallySignificant 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 mitigationmeasure has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency mustdescribe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigationmeasures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).

5. Earlier analyses may 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 shouldidentify the following:

a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.

b. 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 bymitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

c. 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 addresssite-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 becited in the discussion.

8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normallyaddress the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. 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 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES AIR QUALITY BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CULTURAL RESOURCES GEOLOGY AND SOILS

GREENHOUSE GASEMISSIONS

HAZARDSANDHAZARDOUSMATERIALS

HYDROLOGYAND WATERQUALITY

LAND USEANDPLANNING

MINERALRESOURCES

NOISE

POPULATION AND HOUSING PUBLIC SERVICES RECREATION TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC TRIBAL CULTURALRESOURCES

UTILITIES AND SERVICESYSTEMS

MANDATORYFINDINGS OFSIGNIFICANCE

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST (To be completed by the Lead City Agency) Background PROPONENT NAME: PHONE NUMBER:Symphony Northridge LLC (310) 663-3534 APPLICANT ADDRESS:11828 La Grange Avenue, Suite 225Los Angeles, CA 90025AGENCY REQUIRING CHECKLIST: DATE SUBMITTED:Department of City Planning 10/09/2015PROPOSAL NAME (if Applicable):Northridge Mixed-Use


I. AESTHETICS 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 within a state scenic highway?

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

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

II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide

Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to theFarmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California ResourcesAgency, to nonagricultural use?

b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined

in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by PublicResources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production(as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?

d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location

or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use orconversion of forest land to non-forest use?

III. AIR QUALITY a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality 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 forwhich the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or stateambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceedquantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?

d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat

modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or specialstatus species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by theCalifornia Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitivenatural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations orby the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and WildlifeService?

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

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

e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, NaturalCommunity Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or statehabitat conservation plan?

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES


Potentiallysignificant

impact

Less thansignificant

withmitigation

incorporated


impact No impact

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historicalresource as defined in § 15064.5?

b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeologicalresource pursuant to § 15064.5?

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

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

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including

the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquakefault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault ZoningMap issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantialevidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology SpecialPublication 42.

b. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, includingthe risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Strong seismic ground shaking?

c. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, includingthe risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction?

d. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, includingthe risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Landslides?

e. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? f. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become

unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-sitelandslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

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

h. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks oralternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available forthe disposal of waste water?

VII. GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may

have a significant impact on the environment?

b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purposeof reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 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 throughreasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release ofhazardous materials into the environment?

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

d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sitescompiled 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 planhas not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public useairport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing orworking in the project area?

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

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

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 10 of 35


impact


withmitigation

incorporated


impact No impact

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

IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with

groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volumeor a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate ofpreexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not supportexisting land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?

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

d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, includingthrough the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantiallyincrease the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would resultin flooding on- or off-site?

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

f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal

Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazarddelineation map?

h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede orredirect flood flows?

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

j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X. LAND USE AND PLANNING a. Physically divide an established community? b. Conflict with any 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, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for thepurpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

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

XI. MINERAL RESOURCES 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 resourcerecovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other landuse plan?

XII. NOISE a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards

established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicablestandards of other agencies?

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

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

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

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 11 of 35


impact


withmitigation

incorporated


impact No impact

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

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

XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example,

by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, throughextension of roads or other infrastructure)?

b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating theconstruction of replacement housing elsewhere?

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

XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated

with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need fornew or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of whichcould cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptableservice ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of thepublic services: Fire protection?

b. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associatedwith the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need fornew or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of whichcould cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptableservice ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of thepublic services: Police protection?

c. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associatedwith the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need fornew or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of whichcould cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptableservice ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of thepublic services: Schools?

d. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associatedwith the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need fornew or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of whichcould cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptableservice ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of thepublic services: Parks?

e. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associatedwith the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need fornew or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of whichcould cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptableservice ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of thepublic services: Other public facilites?

XV. RECREATION a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional

parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physicaldeterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

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

XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of

effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into accountall modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized traveland relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited tointersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths,and mass transit?

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 12 of 35


impact


withmitigation

incorporated


impact No impact

b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, butnot limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or otherstandards established by the county congestion management agency fordesignated roads or highways?

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

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

e. Result in inadequate emergency access? f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit,

bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance orsafety of such facilities supporting alternative transportation (e.g., busturnouts, bicycle racks)?

XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural

resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site,feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of thesize and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value toa California Native American tribe, and that is: Listed or eligible for listing inthe California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register ofhistorical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or

b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal culturalresource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site,feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of thesize and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value toa California Native American tribe, and that is: A resource determined by thelead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to besignificant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public ResourcesCode Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) ofPublic Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider thesignificance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

XVIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS 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 treatmentfacilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which couldcause significant environmental effects?

c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities orexpansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could causesignificant environmental effects?

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

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

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

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

XIX. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,

substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish orwildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate aplant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rareor endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the majorperiods of California history or prehistory?

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 13 of 35


impact


withmitigation

incorporated


impact No impact

b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulativelyconsiderable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incrementaleffects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with theeffects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects ofprobable future projects)?

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

Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083, 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 65088.4, Gov. Code; Sections 21080,21083.05, 21095, Pub. Resources Code; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Protectthe Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the DowntownPlan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656.

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 14 of 35


impact


withmitigation

incorporated


impact No impact

DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Attach additional sheets if necessary)

The Environmental Impact Assessment includes the use of official City of Los Angeles and other government source referencematerials related to various environmental impact categories (e.g., Hydrology, Air Quality, Biology, Cultural Resources, etc.). The Stateof California, Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology - Seismic Hazard Maps and reports, are used to identifypotential future significant seismic events; including probable magnitudes, liquefaction, and landslide hazards. Based on applicantinformation provided in the Master Land Use Application and Environmental Assessment Form, impact evaluations were based onstated facts contained therein, including but not limited to, reference materials indicated above, field investigation of the project site,and any other reliable reference materials known at the time. Project specific impacts were evaluated based on all relevant facts indicated in the Environmental Assessment Form and expressedthrough the applicant's project description and supportive materials. Both the Initial Study Checklist and Checklist Explanations, inconjunction with the City of Los Angeles's Adopted Thresholds Guide and CEQA Guidelines, were used to reach reasonableconclusions on environmental impacts as mandated under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project as identified in the project description may cause potentially significant impacts on the environment without mitigation.Therefore, this environmental analysis concludes that a Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be issued to avoid and mitigate allpotential adverse impacts on the environment by the imposition of mitigation measures and/or conditions contained and expressed inthis document; the environmental case file known as ENV-2015-3703-MND and the associated case(s), CPC-2015-3702-GPA-VZC-SPR . Finally, based on the fact that these impacts can be feasibly mitigated to less than significant, andbased on the findings and thresholds for Mandatory Findings of Significance as described in the California Environmental Quality Act,section 15065, the overall project impact(s) on the environment (after mitigation) will not:

Substantially degrade environmental quality. Substantially reduce fish or wildlife habitat. Cause a fish or wildlife habitat to drop below self sustaining levels. Threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. Reduce number, or restrict range of a rare, threatened, or endangered species. Eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. Achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals. Result in environmental effects that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. Result in environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: All supporting documents and references are contained in the Environmental Case File referenced above and may be viewed in theEIR Unit, Room 763, City Hall. For City information, addresses and phone numbers: visit the City's website at http://www.lacity.org ; City Planning - and ZoningInformation Mapping Automated System (ZIMAS) cityplanning.lacity.org/ or EIR Unit, City Hall, 200 N Spring Street, Room 763. Seismic Hazard Maps - http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/Engineering/Infrastructure/Topographic Maps/Parcel Information - http://boemaps.eng.ci.la.ca.us/index01.htm or City's main website under the heading "Navigate LA".

PREPARED BY:

SARAH HOUNSELL

TITLE:

City Planner

TELEPHONE NO.:

(818) 374-9917

DATE:

01/12/2018

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 15 of 35

APPENDIX A: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS EXPLANATION TABLE

I. AESTHETICS a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The project site is located in the center portion of the Northridge Community

Plan approximately 330 feet west of California State University, Northridge(CUSN). The area has a pattern of low to medium density residential uses andcommercial along the Reseda Boulevard corridor. The project site is bisectedin the middle by the Commercial Center boundary line of the NorthridgeCommunity Plan. The proposed amendment to the plan would move thatboundary to the northern portion of the site for a uniformed development of onezone and one land use designation. In the last decade other mixed-use projecthave been developed in the vicinity with ground-floor retail establishmentswith offices or residential units on upper floors.Therefore, although theproposed project would substantially increase the density and massing ofdevelopment on the project site, project implementation would not obstructany views of unique scenic vistas or focal points. Therefore, impacts related toscenic vistas would be less than significant. Development of the proposedproject would result in an incremental intensification of existing prevailing landuses in an already urbanized area of Los Angeles. Furthermore, developmentof the project and related projects is expected to occur in accordance withadopted plans and regulations. Therefore, cumulative aesthetic impacts wouldbe less than significant.

b. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would substantiallydamage scenic resources within a State Scenic Highway. The City of LosAngeles’ General Plan Mobility Element (Citywide General Plan CirculationSystem Maps) as well as the CalTrans website athttp://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/langeles.htmindicates that no StateCity-designated scenic highways are located near theproject site. Therefore, no impacts related to a State scenic highways wouldoccur.

c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would substantiallydegrade the existing visual character or quality of the project site and itssurroundings. Significant impacts to the visual character of a site and itssurroundings are generally based on the removal of features with aestheticvalue, the introduction of contrasting urban features into a local area, and thedegree to which the elements of the proposed project detract from the visualcharacter of an area.The project area is developed with a mix of land uses,including residential, commercial, and institutional. The CSUN campus islocated to the east of the project site. Immediately north and east of theproject site are low-rise multi-family residential buildings and to the south andwest of the project site are commercial strip.The proposed project wouldinclude design features and landscaping improvements to enhance the visualquality of the area. Accordingly, the proposed project would not degrade theexisting visual character or quality of the project site and its surroundings.Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impacton visual quality.

d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if light and glare substantially altered thecharacter of off-site areas surrounding the site or interfered with theperformance of an off-site activity. Light impacts are typically associated withthe use of artificial light during the evening and night-time hours. Glare maybe a daytime occurrence caused by the reflection of sunlight or artificial lightfrom highly polished surfaces, such as window glass and reflective claddingmaterials, and may interfere with the safe operation of a motor vehicle on

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 16 of 35

Impact? ExplanationMitigationMeasures

adjacent streets. Daytime glare is common in urban areas and is typicallyassociated with mid- to high-rise buildings with exterior façades largely orentirely comprised of highly reflective glass or mirror-like materials. Nighttimeglare is primarily associated with bright point-source lighting that contrastswith existing low ambient light conditions.Due to the urbanized nature of thearea, a moderate level of ambient nighttime light already exists. Nighttimelighting sources include street lights, vehicle headlights, and interior andexterior building illumination. The proposed project would include nighttimesecurity lighting primarily along the perimeter of the project site. However, thesecurity lighting would be night-friendly LEDs and would not substantiallychange existing ambient nighttime lighting conditions. The proposed projectdoes not include any elements or features that would create substantial newsources of glare. Therefore, light and glare impacts would be less thansignificant.

II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES a. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would convert valued

farmland to non-agricultural uses. The project site is developed with a surfaceparking lot and a leased United State Post Office building. No Farmland,agricultural uses, or related operations are present within the project site orsurrounding area. Due to its urban setting, the project site and surroundingarea are not included in the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of theCalifornia Resources Agency. Therefore, the proposed project would notconvert any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of StatewideImportance to non-agricultural use, and no impact would occur.

b. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project conflicted with existingagricultural zoning or agricultural parcels enrolled under the Williamson Act.The project site is not zoned for agricultural use or under a WilliamsonContract. As the project site and surrounding area do not contain farmland ofany type, the proposed project would not conflict with a Williamson Contract.Therefore, no impacts would occur.

c. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project conflicted with existingzoning or caused rezoning of forest land or timberland, or resulted in the lossof forest land or in the conversion of forest land to non-forest use. The projectsite and the surrounding area are not zoned for forest land or timberland.Accordingly, the proposed project would not conflict with forest land ortimberland zoning or result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forestland to non-forest use. Therefore, no impact would occur.

d. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project conflicted with existingzoning or caused rezoning of forest land or timberland, or resulted in the lossof forest land or in the conversion of forest land to non-forest use. The projectsite and the surrounding area are not zoned for forest land or timberland.Accordingly, the proposed project would not conflict with forest land ortimberland zoning or result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forestland to non-forest use. Therefore, no impact would occur.

e. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project caused the conversionof farmland to non-agricultural use. The project site does not contain farmland,forestland, or timberland. Therefore, no impacts would occur.

III. AIR QUALITY a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The 2012 AQMP provides base year emissions and future baseline emission

projections for the South Coast Air Basin. In doing so, the 2012 AQMPincorporates, in part, Southern California Association of Government’s(SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy(RTP/SCS) 2012-2035 RTP/SCS socio-economic forecast projections ofregional population and employment growth. A project would not conflict withthe AQMP if it is consistent with the population, housing and employment

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 17 of 35


the AQMP if it is consistent with the population, housing and employmentassumptions that were used in the development of the AQMP. The levels ofpopulation for the project are consistent with population forecasts as adoptedby SCAG. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the AQMP,and impacts would be less than significant.

b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would violate any airquality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected airquality violation. An Air Quality Assessment for the project site was preparedby ENVICOM Corporation in April 2017 (see attachment). Project constructionand operation emissions were estimated using California Emissions EstimatorModel (CalEEMod), a statewide land use emissions computer model designedto quantify potential criteria pollutant emissions associated with bothconstruction and operations from land use projects. The results are shown inTable 6, Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission in pounds per day).According to the Assessment, during the construction phase the proposedproject would not exceed the regional SCAQMD significance thresholds foremissions of Carbon Monoxide (CO), Reactive Organic Compounds (ROG),Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and SulfurDioxide (SOx). Therefore, regional emission impacts for the proposed projectwould be less than significant for all construction phases. The project output isalso below the significance thresholds for these criteria pollutants with regardto Overall Operational Emissions, as shown in Table 8. Motor vehicles thataccess the project site would be the predominant source of long-term projectemissions. Additional emissions would be generated by area sources, such asenergy use and landscape maintenance activities. Therefore, the proposedproject would result in a less-than-significant impact related to regionaloperational emissions. The project would be subject to regulatory compliancemeasures, which reduce the impacts of operational and construction regionalemissions.

c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The project will produce fugitive dust and mobile source emissions as a resultof construction activity. The proposed project and the entire Los Angelesmetropolitan area are located within the South Coast Air Basin, which ischaracterized by relatively poor air quality. The Basin is currently classified asa federal and State non-attainment area for Ozone (O3), RespirableParticulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and lead (Pb) and a federalattainment/maintenance area for Carbon Monoxide (CO). It is classified as aState attainment area for CO, and it currently meets the federal and Statestandards for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Sulfur Oxides (SOX), and lead (Pb).Because the Basin is designated as a State and/or federal nonattainment airbasin for O3, PM10, PM2.5, and NO2, there is an on-going regionalcumulative impact associated with these pollutants. However, an individualproject can emit these pollutants without significantly contributing to thiscumulative impact depending on the magnitude of emissions. This magnitudeis determined by the project-level significance thresholds established by theSCAQMD. The project would be subject to regulatory compliance measures,which reduce the impacts of operational and construction regional emissions.A project of this size (128 of units and 5,725 square feet of commercial space)would not likely exceed the project-level SCAQMD localized significancethresholds for criteria air pollutants and the impact would be less thansignificant.

d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based on the City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide, a significantimpact may occur if a project were to generate pollutant concentrations to adegree that would significantly affect sensitive receptors. The SCAQMDidentifies the following as sensitive receptors: long-term health care facilities,rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences,schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. The SCAQMD

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 18 of 35


has developed localized significance thresholds (LSTs) that are based on theamount of maximum daily localized construction emissions per day that can begenerated by a project that would cause or contribute to adverse localized airquality impacts. These apply to projects that are less than or equal to fiveacres in size and are only applicable to Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10and PM2.5), Carbon Monoxide (CO), and Nitrogen Oxides (NOx). An AirQuality Assessment for the project site was prepared by ENVICOMCorporation in April 2017 (see attachment). The Assessment quantifies andanalyzes the localized air quality impacts associated with the projectconstruction. According to the Assessment, the proposed project would notexceed the appropriate significance threshold for localized emissions ofParticulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5), Carbon Monoxide (CO), and NitrogenOxides (NOx). Therefore, localized emission impacts for the proposed projectwould be less than significant for all construction phases and the proposedproject would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial localized criteriapollutant emissions during construction. The California Air Resources Board(CARB) has published guidance for locating new sensitive receptors (e.g.,residences) away from nearby sources of air pollution. Relevantrecommendations include avoiding siting new sensitive land uses within 500feet of a freeway or 300 feet of a large gas station (defined as a facility with athroughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater). The project site does nothave either of these uses in those radiuses. Therefore the location of theproposed project would be consistent with the CARB recommendations forlocating new sensitive receptors. Therefore, the proposed project would resultin a less-than-significant impact.

e. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities includeequipment exhaust and architectural coatings. Odors from these sourceswould be localized and generally confined to the immediate area surroundingthe project site. The proposed project would utilize typical constructiontechniques, and the odors would be typical of most construction sites andtemporary in nature. Construction of the proposed project would not cause anodor nuisance. According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, landuses and industrial operations that are associated with odor complaintsinclude agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants,chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies and fiberglassmolding. The proposed land uses would not result in activities that createobjectionable odors. Therefore, the proposed project would result in aless-than-significant impact related to objectionable odors.

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH

MITIGATION INCORPORATED A project would have a significant biological impact through the loss ordestruction of individuals of a species or through the degradation ofsensitive habitat. The project site is located in an urbanized area,immediately adjacent to and partly within the Commercial Center and ahalf block from the CSUN campus. Vegetation on the project site islimited to seven trees along the Reseda Boulevard frontage includingfive shade trees and two palms and ornamental landscaping. All of theon-site trees will be removed or disturbed during construction. The twostreet trees will likely be relocated to allow for driveway circulation.Nesting birds are protected under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA) (Title 33, United States Code, Section 703 et seq., see also Title50, Code of Federal Regulation, Part 10) and Section 3503 of theCalifornia Department of Fish and Wildlife Code. Thus, the projectapplicant shall comply with the mitigation measures to ensure that nosignificant impacts to nesting birds or sensitive biological species orhabitat would occur. Therefore, with mitigation, the impacts would bereduced to less than significant.

IV-20,IV-70

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 19 of 35


b. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if any riparian habitat or natural communitywould be lost or destroyed as a result of urban development. The project sitedoes not contain any riparian habitat and does not contain any streams orwater courses necessary to support riparian habitat. Therefore, the proposedproject would not have any effect on riparian habitat or other sensitive naturalcommunity identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by theCalifornia Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or the United States Fishand Wildlife Services (USFWS), and no impacts would occur.

c. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if federally protected wetlands would bemodified or removed by a project. The project site does not contain anyfederally protected wetlands, wetland resources, or other waters of the UnitedStates as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The project site islocated in a highly urbanized area and developed/previously developed withresidential, office, and commercial uses. Therefore, the proposed projectwould not have any effect on federally protected wetlands as defined bySection 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernalpool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, orother means, and no impacts would occur.

d. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would interfere with, orremove access to, a migratory wildlife corridor or impede use of native wildlifenursery sites. Due to the highly urbanized nature of the project site andsurrounding area, the lack of a major water body, and the limited number oftrees, the project site does not support habitat for native resident or migratoryspecies or contain native nurseries. Therefore, the proposed project would notinterfere with wildlife movement or impede the use of native wildlife nurserysites, and no impact would occur.

e. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would be inconsistentwith local regulations pertaining to biological resources. The proposed projectwould not conflict with any policies or ordinances protecting biologicalresources, such as the City of Los Angeles Protected Tree Ordinance (No.177,404). The project site does not contain locally-protected biologicalresources, such as oak trees, Southern California black walnut, westernsycamore, and California bay trees. The proposed project would be required tocomply with the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and theCalifornia Fish and Game Code (CFGC). Both the MBTA and CDFW protectsmigratory birds that may use trees on or adjacent to the project site fornesting, and may be disturbed during construction of the proposed project.Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any local policies orordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy orordinance (e.g., oak trees or California walnut woodlands), and no impactswould occur.

f. NO IMPACT The project site and its vicinity are not part of any draft or adopted HabitatConservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approvedlocal, regional or state habitat conservation plan. The project site and itsvicinity are not part of any draft or adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, NaturalCommunity Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or statehabitat conservation plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflictwith the provisions of any adopted conservation plan, and no impacts wouldoccur. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the provisions ofany adopted conservation plan, and no impacts would occur.

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 20 of 35


a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would substantiallyalter the environmental context of, or remove identified historical resources.The project includes the demolition of a one-story UPSO leased buildingconstructed in 1961. However, according to a Historic Resources Assessment(HRA) completed by ESA PCR, August 2016 the structure has been identifiedas a historic resource by local or state agencies, and the project site has notbeen determined to be eligible for listing in the National Register of HistoricPlaces, California Register of Historical Resources, the Los AngelesHistoric-Cultural Monuments Register, and/or any local register. SurveyLA, thecitywide survey of Los Angeles or the City’s HistoricPlacesLA websiteidentified the subject property as potentially significant, citing it as “an excellentexample of a 1960s post office…that reflects its suburb’s expandingpopulation and rising demand for government services after World War II” andas “a building exhibiting the design features and building standards commonlyapplied to federal postal facilities building in the postwar era”. The building waspart of the USPS lease –to-purchase “Thousands Series” program, but wasnever purchased nor owned by any government agency. However, basedupon further elevation by ESA PCR found substantial evidence to show thesubject property does not meet the eligibility requirements. In addition, the sitewas not found to be a potential historic resource based on discussion andreview of the HRA with the Planning Department’s Office of HistoricResources. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITHMITIGATION INCORPORATED

A significant impact would occur if a known or unknown archaeologicalresource would be removed, altered, or destroyed as a result of theproposed development. Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelinesdefines significant archaeological resources as resources that meet thecriteria for historical resources or resources that constitute uniquearchaeological resources. A project-related significant impact couldoccur if a project would significantly affect archaeological resources thatfall under either of these categories.

V-50

c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITHMITIGATION INCORPORATED

A significant impact would occur if excavation or construction activitiesassociated with the proposed project would disturb paleontological orunique geological features. If paleontological resources are discoveredduring excavation, grading, or construction, the City of Los AngelesDepartment of Building and Safety shall be notified immediately, and allwork shall cease in the area of the find until a qualified paleontologistevaluates the find. Construction activity may continue unimpeded onother portions of the Project site. The paleontologist shall determine thelocation, the time frame, and the extent to which any monitoring ofearthmoving activities shall be required. The found deposits would betreated in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines, includingthose set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2.Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if previously interred human remains wouldbe disturbed during excavation of the project site. Human remains could beencountered during excavation and grading activities associated with theproposed project. While no formal cemeteries, other places of humaninterment, or burial grounds or sites are known to occur within the projectarea, there is always a possibility that human remains can be encounteredduring construction. If human remains are encountered unexpectedly duringconstruction demolition and/or grading activities, State Health and SafetyCode Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until theCounty Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and dispositionpursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98. Ifhuman remains of Native American origin are discovered during projectconstruction, compliance with state laws, which fall within the jurisdiction of the

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 21 of 35


Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) (Public Resource CodeSection 5097), relating to the disposition of Native American burials will beadhered to. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would cause personal

injury or death or result in property damage as a result of a fault ruptureoccurring on the project site and if the project site is located within aState-designated Alquist-Priolo Zone or other designated fault zone.According to the California Department of Conservation Special Studies ZoneMap, the project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Special StudiesZone or Fault Rupture Study Area. The proposed project would not exposepeople or structures to potential adverse effects resulting from the rupture ofknown earthquake faults. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act isintended to mitigate the hazard of surface fault rupture on structures forhuman occupancy. Therefore, no impacts would occur.

b. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would cause personalinjury or death or resulted in property damage as a result of seismic groundshaking. The entire Southern California region is susceptible to strong groundshaking from severe earthquakes. Consequently, development of theproposed project could expose people and structures to strong seismic groundshaking. However, the proposed project would be designed and constructed inaccordance with State and local Building Codes to reduce the potential forexposure of people or structures to seismic risks to the maximum extentpossible. The proposed project would be required to comply with the CaliforniaDepartment of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), whichprovides guidance for the evaluation and mitigation of earthquake-relatedhazards, and with the seismic safety requirements in the Uniform BuildingCode (UBC) and the LAMC. Compliance with such requirements wouldreduce seismic ground shaking impacts to the maximum extent practicablewith current engineering practices. Therefore, impacts related to strongseismic ground shaking would be less than significant.

c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon the criteria established in the City of Los Angeles CEQAThresholds Guide, a significant impact may occur if a proposed project site islocated within a liquefaction zone. Liquefaction is the loss of soil strength orstiffness due to a buildup of pore-water pressure during severe groundshaking. This site is not located in the California Department of Conservation’sSeismic Hazard Zones Map, and the project site is not located within aliquefaction zone. Therefore, no impact related to seismic-related groundfailure, including liquefaction, would occur.

d. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would be implementedon a site that would be located in a hillside area with unstable geologicalconditions or soil types that would be susceptible to failure when saturated.According to the California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines andGeology, the Seismic Hazard Zones Map for this area shows the project site isnot located within a landslide hazard zone. The project site and surroundingarea are relatively flat. Therefore, the proposed project would not exposepeople or structures to potential effects resulting from landslides, and noimpacts would occur.

e. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if construction activities or future uses wouldresult in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Construction of theproposed project would result in ground surface disturbance during siteclearance, excavation, and grading, which could create the potential for soilerosion to occur. In addition, excavation activities would be necessary toaccommodate the proposed project, which would include two subterraneanlevels of parking. Construction activities would be performed in accordance

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 22 of 35


with the requirements of the Los Angeles Building Code and the Los AngelesRegional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) through the City’sStormwater Management Division. In addition, the proposed project would berequired to develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). TheSWPPP would require implementation of an erosion control plan to reduce thepotential for wind or waterborne erosion during the construction process. Inaddition, all onsite grading and site preparation would comply with applicableprovisions of Chapter IX, Division 70 of the LAMC, and conditions imposed bythe City of Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety’s Grading Division.Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur with respect to erosionor loss of topsoil.

f. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITHMITIGATION INCORPORATED

A significant impact would occur if any unstable geological conditionswould result in any type of geological failure, including lateral spreading,off-site landslides, liquefaction, or collapse. Development of theproposed project would not have the potential to expose people andstructures to seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction andlandslide; see VI c-d for these issues. Subsidence and ground collapsegenerally occur in areas with active groundwater withdrawal orpetroleum production. The extraction of groundwater or petroleum fromsedimentary source rocks can cause the permanent collapse of the porespace previously occupied by the removed fluid. According to the SafetyElement of the City of Los Angeles General Plan Safety Element of theLos Angeles City General Plan, Critical Facilities and Lifeline Systems,Exhibit E and the Environmental and Public Facilities Map (1996), theproject site is not identified as being located in an oil field or within an oildrilling area. The proposed project would be required to implementstandard construction practices that would ensure that the integrity ofthe project site and the proposed structures is maintained. Constructionwill be required by the Department of Building and Safety to comply withthe City of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code (UBC) which is designedto assure safe construction and includes building foundationrequirements appropriate to site conditions. With the implementation ofthe Building Code requirements and the Department of Building andSafety’s Grading Division, the potential for landslide lateral spreading,subsidence, liquefaction or collapse would be less-than-significant.

VI-40

g. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would be built onexpansive soils without proper site preparation or design features to provideadequate foundations for project buildings, thus, posing a hazard to life andproperty. Expansive soils have relatively high clay mineral and expand withthe addition of water and shrink when dried, which can cause damage tooverlying structures. However, the proposed project would be required tocomply with the requirements of the UBC, LAMC, and other applicablebuilding codes. Compliance with such requirements would reduce impactsrelated to expansive soils, and impacts would be less than significant.

h. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A project would cause a significant impact if adequate wastewater disposal isnot available. The project site is located in a highly urbanized area, wherewastewater infrastructure is currently in place. The proposed project wouldconnect to existing sewer lines that serve the project site and would not useseptic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, impactswould be less than significant.

VII. GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 23 of 35


a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Greenhouse gases (GHG) are those gaseous constituents of the atmosphere,both natural and human generated, that absorb and emit radiation at specificwavelengths within the spectrum of terrestrial radiation emitted by the earth’ssurface, the atmosphere itself, and by clouds. The City has adopted the LAGreen Plan to provide a citywide plan for achieving the City’s GHG emissionstargets, for both existing and future generation of GHG emissions. In order toimplement the goal of improving energy conservation and efficiency, the LosAngeles City Council has adopted multiple ordinances and updates toestablish the current Los Angeles Green Building Code (LAGBC) (OrdinanceNo. 181,480). The LAGBC requires projects to achieve a 20 percent reductionin potable water use and wastewater generation. Through requiredimplementation of the LAGBC, the proposed project would be consistent withlocal and statewide goals and policies aimed at reducing the generation ofGHGs. Therefore, the proposed project’s generation of GHG emissions wouldnot make a cumulatively considerable contribution to emissions and impactswould be less than significant.

b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The California legislature passed Senate Bill (SB) 375 to connect regionaltransportation planning to land use decisions made at a local level. SB 375requires the metropolitan planning organizations to prepare a SustainableCommunities Strategy (SCS) in their regional transportation plans to achievethe per capita GHG reduction targets. For the SCAG region, the SCS iscontained in the 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/SustainableCommunities Strategy (RTP/SCS). The 2012-2035 RTP/SCS focuses themajority of new housing and job growth in high-quality transit areas and otheropportunity areas on existing main streets, in downtowns, and commercialcorridors, resulting in more opportunity for transit-oriented development. Inaddition, SB 743, adopted September 27, 2013, encourages land use andtransportation planning decisions that reduce vehicle miles traveled, whichcontribute to GHG emissions, as required by AB 32. The project would provideinfill mixed-use student housing development, proximate to a majortransportation corridor (i.e., Reseda Boulevard, a Boulevard II ), and would notinterfere with SCAG’s ability to implement the regional strategies outlined inthe 2012-2035 RTP/SCS. The proposed project, therefore, would beconsistent with statewide, regional and local goals and policies aimed atreducing GHG emissions and would result in a less-than-significant impactrelated to plans that target the reduction of GHG emissions.

VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would create a

significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routinetransport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Construction of theproposed project would involve the temporary use of potentially hazardousmaterials, including vehicle fuels, oils, and transmission fluids. Operation ofthe project would involve the limited use and storage of common hazardoussubstances typical of those used in multi-family residential andretail/commercial developments, including lubricants, paints, solvents,custodial products (e.g., cleaning supplies), pesticides and other landscapingsupplies, and vehicle fuels, oils, and transmission fluids. No uses or activitiesare proposed that would result in the use or discharge of unregulatedhazardous materials and/or substances, or create a public hazard throughtransport, use, or disposal. As a mixed-use residential (student housing) andcommercial development, the proposed project would not involve largequantities of hazardous materials that would require routine transport, use, ordisposal. With compliance to applicable standards and regulations andadherence to manufacturer’s instructions related to the transport, use, ordisposal of hazardous materials, the proposed project would not create asignificant hazard through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 24 of 35


materials, and impacts would be less than significant. b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project created a significant

hazard to the public or environment due to a reasonably foreseeable releaseof hazardous materials. The existing single-story commercial building on theproject site were built in 1961 and therefore may contain asbestos-containingmaterials (ACMs) and lead-based paint (LBP). Demolition of these buildingswould have the potential to release asbestos fibers into the atmosphere ifsuch materials exist and they are not properly stabilized or removed prior todemolition activities. The removal of asbestos is regulated by SCAQMD Rule1403; therefore, any asbestos found on-site would be required to be removedin accordance with applicable regulations prior to demolition. Similarly, it islikely that lead-based paint is present in buildings constructed prior to 1979.Compliance with existing State laws regarding removal would be required,resulting in a less-than-significant impact.

c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Construction activities have the potential to result in the release, emission,handling, and disposal of hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of anexisting school. The CSUN campus are located approximately 330 feet east ofthe project site. The proposed project would provide for a mixed-use, infilldevelopment that consists of residential and commercial uses. These types ofuses would be expected to use and store very small amounts of hazardousmaterials, such as paints, solvents, cleaners, pesticides, etc. All hazardousmaterials within the project site would be acquired, handled, used, stored,transported, and disposed of in accordance with all applicable federal, State,and local requirements. With this compliance, the proposed project wouldresult in a less-than-significant impact.

d. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the project site is included on a list ofhazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section65962.5 and would create a significant hazard to the public or theenvironment. The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)maintains a database (EnviroStor) that provides access to detailed informationon hazardous waste permitted sites and corrective action facilities, as well asexisting site cleanup information. EnviroStor also provides information oninvestigation, cleanup, permitting, and/or corrective actions that are planned,being conducted, or have been completed under DTSC’s oversight. A reviewof EnviroStor did not identify any records of hazardous waste facilities on theproject site. Therefore, the proposed project would not be located on a sitethat is included on a list of hazardous materials sites or create a significanthazard to the public or the environment, and no impact would occur.

e. NO IMPACT The project site is not located in an airport land use plan area, or within twomiles of any public or public use airports, or private air strips. Therefore, theproposed project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing orworking in the project area, and no impacts would occur.

f. NO IMPACT The project site is not located in an airport land use plan area, or within twomiles of any public or public use airports, or private air strips. Therefore, theproposed project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing orworking in the project area, and no impacts would occur.

g. NO IMPACT The nearest emergency route is Nordhoff Street Avenue, approximately 0.55miles to the south of the project site (City of Los Angeles, Safety Element ofthe Los Angeles City General Plan, Critical Facilities and Lifeline Systems,Exhibit H, November 1996.) The proposed project would not require theclosure of any public or private streets and would not impede emergencyvehicle access to the project site or surrounding area. Additionally, emergencyaccess to and from the project site would be provided in accordance withrequirements of the Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD). Therefore, theproposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 25 of 35


with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, andno impact would occur.

h. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project exposed people andstructures to high risk of wildfire. The project site is located in a highlyurbanized area of the City and the area surrounding the project site iscompletely developed. Accordingly, the project site and the surrounding areaare not subject to wildland fires. Therefore, the proposed project would notexpose people or structures to a risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildlandfires, and no impact would occur.

IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project discharges water that

does not meet the quality standards of agencies which regulate surface waterquality and water discharge into storm water drainage systems, or does notcomply with all applicable regulations as governed by the Los AngelesRegional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB). Stormwater runoff fromthe proposed project has the potential to introduce small amounts of pollutantsinto the stormwater system. Pollutants would be associated with runoff fromlandscaped areas (pesticides and fertilizers) and paved surfaces (ordinaryhousehold cleaners). Thus, the proposed project would be required to complywith the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standardsand the City’s Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control regulations(Ordinance No. 172,176 and No. 173,494) to ensure pollutant loads from theproject site are minimized for downstream receiving waters. The ordinancescontain requirements for construction activities and operation of projects tointegrate low impact development practices and standards for stormwaterpollution mitigation, and maximize open, green and pervious space on allprojects consistent with the City’s landscape ordinance and other relatedrequirements in the City’s Development Best Management Practices (BMPs)Handbook. Conformance would be ensured during the City’s building planreview and approval process. Therefore, the proposed project would result inless-than-significant impacts.

b. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would substantiallydeplete groundwater or interferes with groundwater recharge. The proposedproject would not require the use of groundwater at the project site. Potablewater would be supplied by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power(LADWP), which draws its water supplies from distant sources for which itconducts its own assessment and mitigation of potential environmentalimpacts. Therefore, the project would not require direct additions orwithdrawals of groundwater. Excavation to accommodate subterranean levelsis not proposed at a depth that would result in the interception of existingaquifers or penetration of the existing water table. Therefore, the impact ongroundwater supplies or groundwater recharge would be less than significant.

c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would substantiallyalter the drainage pattern of an existing stream or river so that erosion orsiltation would result. There are no streams or rivers located in the projectvicinity. Project construction would temporarily expose on-site soils to surfacewater runoff. However, compliance with construction-related BMPs and/or theStorm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would control and minimizeerosion and siltation. During project operation, storm water or any runoffirrigation waters would be directed into existing storm drains that are currentlyreceiving surface water runoff under existing conditions. Significant alterationsto existing drainage patterns within the project site and surrounding areawould not occur. Therefore, the proposed project would result inless-than-significant impact related to the alteration of drainage patterns andon- or off-site erosion or siltation.

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 26 of 35


d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would substantiallyalter the drainage pattern of an existing stream or river such that floodingwould result. There are no streams or rivers located in the project vicinity.During project operation, storm water or any runoff irrigation waters would bedirected into existing storm drains that are currently receiving surface waterrunoff under existing conditions. Impermeable surfaces resulting from thedevelopment of the project would not substantially change the volume ofstormwater runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site.Accordingly, significant alterations to existing drainage patterns within the siteand surrounding area would not occur. Therefore, the proposed project wouldresult in less-than-significant impacts related to the alteration of drainagepatterns and on- or off-site flooding.

e. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if runoff water would exceed the capacity ofexisting or planned storm drain systems serving the project site, or if theproposed project would substantially increase the probability that pollutedrunoff would reach the storm drain system. Site-generated surface waterrunoff would continue to flow to the City’s storm drain system. Any project thatcreates, adds, or replaces 500 square feet of impervious surface must complywith the Low impact Development (LID) Ordinance or alternatively, the City’sStandard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), as an LAMCrequirement to address water runoff and storm water pollution. Therefore, theproposed project would result in less-than-significant impacts related toexisting storm drain capacities or water quality.

f. NO IMPACT A significant impact may occur if a project includes potential sources of waterpollutants that would have the potential to substantially degrade water quality.The proposed project does not include potential sources of contaminants,which could potentially degrade water quality and would comply with allfederal, state and local regulations governing stormwater discharge.Therefore, no impact would occur.

g. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would be locatedwithin a 100-year or 500-year floodplain or would impede or redirect floodflows. According to the Safety Element of the City of Los Angeles GeneralPlan Safety Element of the Los Angeles City General Plan, Critical Facilitiesand Lifeline Systems, Exhibit F and NavigateLA, the project site is not locatedwithin a 100-year or 500-year floodplain. Therefore, the proposed projectwould not be located in such areas, and no impact related to flood zoneswould occur.

h. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would be locatedwithin a 100-year or 500-year floodplain or would impede or redirect floodflows. According to the Safety Element of the City of Los Angeles GeneralPlan Safety Element of the Los Angeles City General Plan, Critical Facilitiesand Lifeline Systems, Exhibit F and NavigateLA, the project site is not locatedwithin a 100-year or 500-year floodplain. Therefore, the proposed projectwould not be located in such areas, and no impact related to flood zoneswould occur.

i. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would be locatedwithin an area susceptible to flooding as a result of the failure of a levee ordam. According to USGS topographic maps(https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/) the site is not located near anyreservoirs or bodies of water. The project site and the surrounding areas arenot located within a flood hazard area. Accordingly, the proposed projectwould not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, ordeath involving flooding. Therefore, the proposed project would have noimpact related to flooding.

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 27 of 35


j. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would be locatedwithin an area susceptible to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Aseiche is an oscillation of a body of water in an enclosed or semi-enclosedbasin, such as a reservoir, harbor, or lake. A tsunami is a great sea waveproduced by a significant undersea disturbance. Mudflows result from thedown slope movement of soil and/or rock under the influence of gravity. Theproject site and the surrounding areas are not located near a water body to beinundated by seiche. Therefore, the project would have no impact related toinundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

X. LAND USE AND PLANNING a. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would be sufficiently

large or configured in such a way so as to create a physical barrier within anestablished community. A physical division of an established community iscaused by an impediment to through travel or a physical barrier, such as a newfreeway with limited access between neighborhoods on either side of thefreeway, or major street closures. The proposed project would not involve anystreet vacation or closure or result in development of new thoroughfares orhighways. The proposed project, the construction of new mixed-use, infilldevelopment in an urbanized area in Los Angeles, would not divide anestablished community. Therefore, no impact would occur.

b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact may occur if a project is inconsistent with the GeneralPlan or zoning designations currently applicable to the project site, and wouldcause adverse environmental effects, which the General Plan and zoningordinance are designed to avoid or mitigate. The site is located within theNorthridge Community Plan Area. The site is zoned C2-1VL and RA-1, withGeneral Plan land use designations of Community Commercial and MediumResidential. The proposed project would be comprised of 128 residentialdwelling units and 5,725 square feet of commercial uses. Both Commercialand Residential uses are permitted in C2 zoned lots with a developmentdensity of 800 square feet per dwelling unit and the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) isrestricted to 1.5:1 (LAMC). Development on the Medium Residential would bepermitted at a 3:1 FAR. The proposed unified project would not conform to theallowable land uses and zoning pursuant to the Los Angeles Municipal Code.The introduction of the RAS4 Zone is proposed under a General PlanAmendment to permit a development density of 400 square feet per dwellingand a 3:1 FAR only in the special boundary for the Commercial Center asdepicted on the Northridge Community Plan General Plan Land Use Map.Also proposed is a General Plan Amendment from Medium Residential toCommunity Commercial for the northern portion of the site. The decisionmakers will determine whether discretionary requests will conflict withapplicable plans/policies. Impacts related to land use have been mitigatedelsewhere, or are addressed through compliance with existing regulations.Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

c. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project were located within anarea governed by a habitat conservation plan or natural communityconservation plan. The project site is not subject to any habitat conservationplan or natural community conservation plan. Therefore, no impact wouldoccur.

XI. MINERAL RESOURCES a. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would result in the

loss of availability of known mineral resources of regional value orlocally-important mineral resource recovery site. According to theConservation Element of the City of Los Angeles General Plan, MineralResources, Exhibit A, the project site is not classified by the City as containingsignificant mineral deposits nor is it designated for mineral extraction land use.

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 28 of 35


In addition, the project site is not identified by the City as being located in anoil field or within an oil drilling area. Therefore, the proposed project would notresult in the loss of availability of any known, regionally- or locally-valuablemineral resource, and no impact would occur.

b. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would result in theloss of availability of known mineral resources of regional value orlocally-important mineral resource recovery site. According to theConservation Element of the City of Los Angeles General Plan, MineralResources, Exhibit A, the project site is not classified by the City as containingsignificant mineral deposits nor is it designated for mineral extraction land use.In addition, the project site is not identified by the City as being located in anoil field or within an oil drilling area. Therefore, the proposed project would notresult in the loss of availability of any known, regionally- or locally-valuablemineral resource, and no impact would occur.

XII. NOISE a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH

MITIGATION INCORPORATED The City of Los Angeles has established policies and regulationsconcerning the generation and control of noise that could adverselyaffect its citizens and noise-sensitive land uses. Construction activitywould result in temporary increases in ambient noise levels in theproject area on an intermittent basis. Noise levels would fluctuatedepending on the construction phase, equipment type and duration ofuse, distance between the noise source and receptor, and presence orabsence of noise attenuation barriers. Construction noise for the projectwill cause a temporary increase in the ambient noise levels, but will besubject to the LAMC Sections 112.05 (Maximum Noise Level of PoweredEquipment or Powered Hand Tools) and 41.40 (Noise Due toConstruction, Excavation Work – When Prohibited) regardingconstruction hours and construction equipment noise thresholds.However, with mitigation construction and demolition shall be restrictedto the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 8:00a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. The project shall comply with the City ofLos Angeles General Plan Noise Element and Ordinance No. 161,574,which prohibits the emission of creation of noise beyond certain levelsat adjacent uses unless technically infeasible. Therefore, the noiseexposure impact would be less than significant.

XII-20,XII-60,XII-170

b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Construction activities can generate varying degrees of vibration, dependingon the construction procedures and the type of construction equipment used.The operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that spreadthrough the ground and diminish with distance from the source. Unless heavyconstruction activities are conducted extremely close (within a few feet) to theneighboring structures, vibrations from construction activities rarely reach thelevels that damage structures. By complying with regulations, the projectwould result in a less-than-significant impact related to construction vibration.

c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the project caused a substantial permanentincrease in noise levels above existing ambient levels. New stationary sourcesof noise, such as rooftop mechanical HVAC equipment, would be installed onthe proposed development. The design of the equipment will be required tocomply with LAMC Section 112.02, which prohibits noise from air conditioning,refrigeration, heating, pumping, and filtering equipment from exceeding theambient noise level on the premises of other occupied properties by more thanfive dBA. With implementation of the regulations that address rooftopmechanical equipment, a substantial permanent increase for nearby sensitivereceptors would be reduced to a less than significant level.

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 29 of 35


d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the project resulted in substantial temporaryor periodic increase in ambient noise levels. As discussed above, impacts areexpected to be less than significant for construction and operational noise andvibration.

e. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would expose peopleresiding or working in the project area to excessive noise levels from a publicairport or public use airport. The proposed project is not located within twomiles of a public airport or public use airport. The project site is outside of theLos Angeles International Airport Land Use Plan. Accordingly, the proposedproject would not expose people working or residing in the project area toexcessive noise levels from a public airport or public use airport. Therefore, noimpact would occur.

f. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would expose peopleresiding or working in the project area to excessive noise levels from a privateairstrip. The proposed project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip.Accordingly, the proposed project would not expose people working orresiding in the project area to excessive noise levels from a private airstrip.Therefore, no impact would occur.

XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A potentially significant impact would occur if the proposed project would

induce substantial population growth that would not have otherwise occurredas rapidly or in as great a magnitude. The proposed project would result in thedevelopment of 128 residential units. The increase in residential populationresulting from the proposed project would not be considered substantial inconsideration of anticipated growth for the Northridge Community Plan, and iswithin the Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG) 2020population projections for the City in their 2012-2035 Regional TransportationPlan. The project would meet a growing demand for housing near jobs andtransportation centers, consistent with State, regional and local regulationsdesigned to reduce trips and greenhouse gas emissions. Operation of theproposed project would not induce substantial population growth in the projectarea, either directly or indirectly. The physical secondary or indirect impacts ofpopulation growth such as increased traffic or noise have been adequatelymitigated in other portions of this document. Therefore, the impact would beless than significant.

b. NO IMPACT A potentially significant impact would occur if the proposed project woulddisplace a substantial quantity of existing residences or a substantial numberof people. The proposed project would result in the demolition of commercialfacility and would no displace any residences.

c. NO IMPACT A potentially significant impact would occur if the proposed project woulddisplace a substantial quantity of existing residences or a substantial numberof people. The proposed project would result in the demolition of commercialfacility and would no displace any residences.

XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD)

could not adequately serve the proposed project, necessitating a new orphysically altered station. The project site and the surrounding area arecurrently served by three LAFD stations -- Fire Station 70, located at 9861Reseda Bouelvard (approximately 0.37 miles north of the project site). Theproposed project would result in a net increase of 128 units, which couldincrease the number of emergency calls and demand for LAFD fire andemergency services. To maintain the level of fire protection and emergencyservices, the LAFD may require additional fire personnel and equipment.However, given that there are existing fire stations are in close proximity to the

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 30 of 35


project site, it is not anticipated that there would be a need to build a new orexpand an existing fire station to serve the proposed project and maintainacceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives forfire protection. By analyzing data from previous years and continuouslymonitoring current data regarding response times, types of incidents, and callfrequencies, LAFD can shift resources to meet local demands for fireprotection and emergency services. The proposed project would neither createcapacity or service level problems nor result in substantial adverse physicalimpacts associated with the provision of new or physically alteredgovernmental facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, responsetimes or other performance objectives for fire protection. Therefore, theproposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact.

b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD)could not adequately serve the proposed project, necessitating a new orphysically altered station. The proposed project would result in a net increaseof 128 units and could increase demand for police service. The project site andthe surrounding area are currently served by LAPD’s Devonshire PoliceStation, located at 1130 S. Vermont Avenue (approximately 0.8 mile northeastof the project site).

c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would includesubstantial employment or population growth, which could generate a demandfor school facilities that would exceed the capacity of the school district. Theproposed project would add 128 residential units, which could increaseenrollment at schools that serve the area. However, development of theproposed project would be subject to California Government Code Section65995, which would allow LAUSD to collect impact fees from developers ofnew residential and commercial space. Conformance to CaliforniaGovernment Code Section 65995 is deemed to provide full and completemitigation of impacts to school facilities. Therefore, the proposed project wouldresult in a less-than-significant impact to public schools.

d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would exceed thecapacity or capability of the local park system to serve the proposed project.The City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks (RAP) isresponsible for the provision, maintenance, and operation of publicrecreational and park facilities and services in the City. The proposed projectwould result in a net increase of 128 units, which could result in increaseddemand for parks and recreation facilities. Pursuant to Section 21.10 of theLAMC, the applicant shall pay the Dwelling Unit Construction Tax forconstruction of apartment buildings. Therefore, the proposed project would notcreate capacity or service level problems, or result in substantial physicalimpacts associated with the provision or new or altered parks facilities.Accordingly, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impacton park facilities.

e. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would result insubstantial employment or population growth that could generate a demandfor other public facilities, including libraries, which exceed the capacityavailable to serve the project site, necessitating new or physically alteredpublic facilities, the construction of which would cause significantenvironmental impacts. The proposed project would result in a net increase of128 units, which could result in increased demand for library services andresources of the Los Angeles Public Library System. However, the proposedproject would not create substantial capacity or service level problems thatwould require the provision of new or expanded public facilities in order tomaintain an acceptable level of service for libraries and other public facilities.Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impacton other public facilities.

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 31 of 35


XV. RECREATION a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Refer to Response to Checklist Question XIV (d) above. b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Refer to Response to Checklist Question XIV (d) above.

XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact may occur if the project conflicts with an applicable plan,

ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for theperformance of the circulation system. The Los Angeles Department ofTransportation (LADOT) has reviewed the traffic analysis prepared by DKSAssociates dated May 10, 2016, for the proposed project. Future traffic hasbeen analyzed for impact at one critical signalized intersection: ResedaBoulevard and Plummer Street. The project is estimated to generate a netdecrease of 850 daily trips, 29 trips in the a.m. peak hour, and 82 trips in thep.m. peak hour. In order to evaluate the effects of the project’s traffic on theavailable transportation infrastructure, LADOT measured the significance ofthe impacts in terms of change to the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio with theproposed project. Based on LADOT traffic impact criteria, the proposed projectis not expected to generate significant traffic impacts at the intersectionidentified for detailed analysis. Therefore, impacts would be less thansignificant.

b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact may occur if the proposed project individually orcumulatively exceeded the service standards of the Los Angeles CountyMetropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Congestion ManagementProgram (CMP). This program was created Statewide as a result ofProposition 111 and has been implemented locally by Metro. The CMP for LosAngeles County requires that the traffic impacts of individual developmentprojects of potential regional significance be analyzed. Specific arterialroadways and all State highways comprise the CMP system, and a total of 164intersections are identified for monitoring throughout Los Angeles County. Thelocal CMP requires that all CMP monitoring intersections be analyzed where aproject would likely add more than 50 trips during either the a.m. or p.m. peakhours. LADOT has reviewed the traffic analysis prepared by DKS Associates,dated May 10, 2016, for the proposed project. The project is the constructionof a 128 dwelling units and 5,725 square feet of commercial. The new projectwill result in a decrease in trips during either the a.m. or p.m. peak hours thanthe current USPS. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

c. NO IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would cause a changein air traffic patterns that would result in a substantial safety risk. The proposedproject does not include an aviation component or include features that wouldinterfere with air traffic patterns. Therefore, no impact would occur.

d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITHMITIGATION INCORPORATED

A significant impact would occur if the proposed project wouldsubstantially increase an existing hazardous design feature or introduceincompatible uses to the existing traffic pattern. The proposed projectwould not include unusual or hazardous design features and theproposed project is compatible with existing uses. However, the projectmay have potentially significant impacts on pedestrians on the streetduring construction phases. With implementation of the referencedmitigation measure, the potential impacts related to hazards would bereduced to less-than-significant.

XVI-80

e. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact may occur if the project design threatened the ability ofemergency vehicles to access and serve the project site or adjacent uses. Thenearest emergency/disaster routes to the project site are Devonshire Street tothe north, Nordhoff Street to the south, and Balboa Boulevard to the east (Cityof Los Angeles, General Plan Safety Element Exhibit H, Critical Facilities &Lifeline Systems, 1996). The proposed project would not require the closure of

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 32 of 35


any public or private streets and would not impede emergency vehicle accessto the project site or surrounding area. Additionally, emergency access to andfrom the project site would be provided in accordance with requirements of theLos Angeles Fire Department (LAFD). Therefore, the proposed project wouldnot result in inadequate emergency access, and no impact would occur.

f. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact may occur if the proposed project would conflict withadopted policies or involve modification of existing alternative transportationfacilities located on- or off-site. The proposed project would not require thedisruption of public transportation services or the alteration of publictransportation routes. Since the proposed project would not modify or conflictwith any alternative transportation policies, plans or programs, it would haveno impact on such programs.

XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) established a formal consultation process for

California Native American Tribes to identify potential significant impacts toTribal Cultural Resources, as defined in Public Resources Code §21074, aspart of CEQA. As specified in AB 52, lead agencies must provide noticeinviting consultation to California Native American tribes that are traditionallyand culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project if theTribe has submitted a request in writing to be notified of proposed projects.The Tribe must respond in writing within 30 days of the City’s AB 52 notice.The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) provided a list of NativeAmerican groups and individuals who might have knowledge of the religiousand/or cultural significance of resources that may be in and near the Projectsite. An informational letter was mailed to a total of 10 Tribes known to haveresources in this area, describing the Project and requesting any informationregarding resources that may exist on or near the Project site. On April 7,2017, one tribal response was received from the Gabrieleno Band of MissionIndians-Kizhnation who requested the C.H.R.I.S report, which was provided tothem on July 3, 2017. There was no further substantive evidence provided bythe tribe to require onsite monitor during grading.

b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) established a formal consultation process forCalifornia Native American Tribes to identify potential significant impacts toTribal Cultural Resources, as defined in Public Resources Code §21074, aspart of CEQA. As specified in AB 52, lead agencies must provide noticeinviting consultation to California Native American tribes that are traditionallyand culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project if theTribe has submitted a request in writing to be notified of proposed projects.The Tribe must respond in writing within 30 days of the City’s AB 52 notice.The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) provided a list of NativeAmerican groups and individuals who might have knowledge of the religiousand/or cultural significance of resources that may be in and near the Projectsite.

XVIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would exceed

wastewater treatment requirements of the Los Angeles Regional Water QualityControl Board (LARWQCB). All wastewater from the project would be treatedaccording to requirements of the NPDES permit authorized by the LARWQCB.Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impactrelated to wastewater treatment requirements.

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 33 of 35


b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would increase waterconsumption or wastewater generation to such a degree that the capacity offacilities currently serving the project site would be exceeded. The LosAngeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) conducts water planningbased on forecast population growth. The addition of 125 units and 5,725square feet of comerical as a result of the proposed project would beconsistent with Citywide growth, and, therefore, the project demand for wateris not anticipated to require new water supply entitlements and/or require theexpansion of existing or construction of new water treatment facilities beyondthose already considered in the LADWP 2015 Urban Water Management Plan(UWMP). Prior to any construction activities, the project applicant would berequired to coordinate with the City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation (BOS)to determine the exact wastewater conveyance requirements of the proposedproject, and any upgrades to the wastewater lines in the vicinity of the projectsite that are needed to adequately serve the proposed project would beundertaken as part of the project. Therefore, the proposed project would havea less-than-significant impact related to water or wastewater infrastructure.

c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would increasesurface water runoff, resulting in the need for expanded off-site storm waterdrainage facilities. Development of the proposed project would maintainexisting drainage patterns; site-generated surface water runoff would continueto flow to the City’s storm drain system. The proposed project would notcreate or contribute runoff water that would exacerbate any existingdeficiencies in the storm drain system or provide substantial additionalsources of polluted runoff. Therefore, the proposed project would result in aless-than-significant impact related to existing storm drain capacities.

d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Refer to Response to Checklist Question XVII (b). e. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Refer to Response to Checklist Question XVII (b). f. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT A significant impact would occur if the proposed project’s solid waste

generation exceeded the capacity of permitted landfills. The Los AngelesBureau of Sanitation (BOS) and private waste management companies areresponsible for the collection, disposal, and recycling of solid waste within theCity, including the project site. Solid waste during the operation of theproposed project is anticipated to be collected by the BOS and private wastehaulers, respectively. As the City's own landfills have all been closed and arenon-operational, the destinations are private landfills. In compliance withAssembly Bill (AB) 939, the project applicant would be required to implement aSolid Waste Diversion Program and divert at least 50 percent of the solidwaste generated by the project from the applicable landfill site. The proposedproject would also comply with all federal, State, and local regulations relatedto solid waste. Therefore, the proposed project would have aless-than-significant impact related to solid waste.

g. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Refer to Response to Checklist Question XVII (f).

XIX. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based on the analysis in this Initial Study, the proposed project would not

have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantiallyreduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife populationto drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animalcommunity, or reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare orendangered plant or animal. Implementation of the mitigation measuresidentified and compliance with existing regulations would reduce impacts toless-than-significant levels.

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 34 of 35


b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITHMITIGATION INCORPORATED

A significant impact may occur if the proposed project, in conjunctionwith the related projects, would result in impacts that are less thansignificant when viewed separately but significant when viewed together.Although projects may be constructed in the project vicinity, thecumulative impacts to which the proposed project would contributewould be less than significant. Implementation of the mitigationmeasures identified would reduce cumulative impacts toless-than-significant levels

c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITHMITIGATION INCORPORATED

A significant impact may occur if the proposed project has the potentialto result in significant impacts, as discussed in the preceding sections.All potential impacts of the proposed project have been identified, andmitigation measures have been prescribed, where applicable, to reduceall potential impacts to less-than-significant levels. Upon implementationof mitigation measures identified and compliance with existingregulations, the proposed project would not have the potential to resultin substantial adverse impacts on human beings either directly orindirectly.

ENV-2015-3703-MND Page 35 of 35


9534 Reseda Boulevard i ESA PCR

Historic Resource Assessment August 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Historic Resource Assessment

Page

I. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 A. Executive Summary ................................................................................................ 1 B. Research and Field Methodology ........................................................................... 5

II. Regulatory Framework ....................................................................................................... 7 A. Federal Level .......................................................................................................... 7

1. National Register of Historic Places .................................................................. 7 B. State Level .............................................................................................................. 9

1. California Register of Historical Resources ....................................................... 9 2. California Office of Historic Preservation Survey Methodology ....................... 11

C. Local Level ............................................................................................................ 12 1. City of Los Angeles .......................................................................................... 12

a. Los Angeles Cultural Heritage Ordinance ............................................ 12

III. Environmental Setting..................................................................................................... 14 A. Historic Context ..................................................................................................... 14

1. Post-War Suburban Development - Northridge (1945-1980) .......................... 14 2. Post Office Facilities after World War II (1945-1970) ...................................... 16 3. Mid-Century Modernism (1945-1970) .............................................................. 22 4. Maxwell Starkman (1956-2004) ....................................................................... 23 5. Construction History of 9534 Reseda Boulevard ............................................ 26

a. Construction History .............................................................................. 26

IV. Evaluation ........................................................................................................................ 31 A. Historical resources identified ............................................................................... 31

1. Historical Resources in the Project Vicinity ...................................................... 31 2. Previous Evaluations of the Project Site .......................................................... 31

B. Evaluation of Potential Historical Resources Within the Project Site ................... 32 1. SurveyLA Registration Requirements and Eligibility Standards...................... 32

a. Federal Infrastructure and Services (1880-1980) ................................. 32 b. Post-War Modernism (1946-1976) ....................................................... 33

2. Evaluation of 9543 Reseda Boulevard ............................................................ 34 a. Architectural Description ........................................................................ 34

C. Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 49

V. Bibliography...................................................................................................................... 50

Table of Contents

Page

9534 Reseda Boulevard ii ESA / Project No.


Appendices

A – Professional Qualifications B – Index and Parcel Maps C – Tract Number 2334 Map (1917) D – Tract Number 24409 Map (1960) E – Previous Evaluation (SurveyLA, 2015) F – DPR Forms (2016)

List of Figures

Figure 1. Regional and Project Vicinity Map ............................................................................ 2 Figure 2. Aerial Photograph of Project Site and Vicinity .......................................................... 3 Figure 3 (Left). Aerial view of Zelzah (Northridge), circa 1918 (Los Angeles Public

Library) ..................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 4 (Right). View of a city street in Zelzah, Date unknown (Los Angeles Public

Library) ..................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 5 (Left). Reseda Boulevard, circa 1956 (Los Angeles Public Library) ......................... 15 Figure 6 (Right). Aerial view of Northridge, circa 1960 (Los Angeles Public Library) ............. 15 Figure 7 (Left). Construction of the San Fernando Valley State University’s campus,

1956 (Los Angeles Public Library) ........................................................................... 16 Figure 8. Maxwell Starkman, date unknown (Los Angeles Times) ......................................... 24 Figure 9. U. S. Post Office in Lancaster, California, designed by Maxwell Starkman

and Associates in 1961 with Wagner Construction. ................................................ 25 Figure 10. U. S. Post Office in La Puente, California, designed by Maxwell Starkman

and Associates in 1962 with Wagner Construction ................................................. 25 Figure 11 (Left). Groundbreaking for the new Northridge Post Office, Valley News

February 2, 1961 Note: the photograph is as it was found in the Valley Times Collection, Los Angeles Public Library and was not altered by the authors of this report. (Valley Times Collection, Los Angeles Public Library) ..................................................................................................................... 26

Figure 12 (Right). Dedication of Northridge Post Office, Valley News, July 11, 1961 (Valley Times Collection, Los Angeles Public Library) ............................................ 26

Figure 13. Aerial view of the Subject Property, 1957 (Historic Aerials) ................................. 27 Figure 14. Aerial view of the Subject Property in 1967 (Historic Aerials) .............................. 28 Figure 15. Front elevation, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view to the north. (ESA PCR

2016) ........................................................................................................................ 34 Figure 16. Detail of recessed entry courtyard showing concrete paving (altered),

aluminum framed windows, plaster spandrels, and perforated screen (alteration) with decorative square-unit concrete block wall, 9534 Reseda Boulevard , view facing south, alterations indicated in red. (ESA PCR 2016) ........ 36

Figure 17. Detail of recessed entry courtyard with planters looking toward customer service and rental post box entry, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view facing northeast, alterations indicated in red. (ESA PCR 2016) ........................................ 37

Figure 18. Detail of recessed entry courtyard with planters looking toward rental mailbox entry, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view facing north, alterations including canopy, door, and planting bed are indicated in red. (ESA PCR 2016) ........................................................................................................................ 37

Figure 19. Detail of south elevation showing square-unit masonry block at the front and two-part configuration of building, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view facing east (ESA PCR 2016) .............................................................................................. 38

Table of Contents

Page

9534 Reseda Boulevard iii ESA PCR

Historic Resource Assessment July 2016

Figure 20. North elevation, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, facing southeast ( ESA PCR 2016) ........................................................................................................................ 39

Figure 21. Detail, north elevation, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view facing southwest (ESA PCR 2016) ...................................................................................................... 39

Figure 22. Rear elevation showing loading dock, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view facing west, alterations indicated in red. (ESA PCR 2016) .................................... 40

Figure 23. The rear elevation looking up to metal decking roof (alteration), 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view facing north (ESA PCR 2016) .......................................... 40

Figure 24. Shed Detail rear elevation showing access doors and security bars on windows at loading dock, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view northwest (ESA PCR 2016) ............................................................................................................... 41

Figure 25. Interior, customer service area, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view southeast (ESA PCR 2016) ...................................................................................................... 41

Figure 26. Interior, mail processing area, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view southwest, alterations indicated in red. (ESA PCR 2016) ........................................................ 42

List of Tables

Table 1 Post Office in the San Fernando Valley ..................................................................... 18 Table 2 Post Offices in Los Angeles Identified in SurveyLA ................................................... 21 Table 3A 9534 Reseda Boulevard Building Permits – Site Prior to Construction of

Post Office 1950-1961 ............................................................................................. 29 Table 3B 9534 Reseda Boulevard Building Permits – Post Office 1961-1995 ....................... 30 Table 3C 9534 Reseda Boulevard Building Permits – Site Development 1995-2005 ............ 30 Table 4 Integrity Matrix: 9534 Reseda Boulevard ................................................................... 45

9534 Reseda 1 ESA PCR


I. INTRODUCTION

A. Executive Summary

The purpose of this Historic Resources Assessment Report and Environmental Impact Analysis

(“Report”) is to identify and evaluate historical resources that may be affected by the

implementation of the proposed residential redevelopment project (“Project”), located at 9534

Reseda Boulevard in the Northridge neighborhood, City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County,

California on assessor parcel numbers (“APN”) 2764-008-018 and 2764-008-003 (“Project Site”

or “subject property”). This Report was prepared to comply with the California Environmental

Quality Act (“CEQA”), to assess the existing buildings and landscapes on the subject property

and neighboring parcels for eligibility as historical resources, and to analyze the potential impacts

of the Project on potential historical resources. This Report, completed by Environmental Science

Associates and PCR Services Corporation (ESA PCR), documents and evaluates the federal,

state, and local significance and eligibility of the subject property. The Report includes a

discussion of the survey methods used, a brief historic context of the property and surrounding

area, the identification and evaluation of the subject property, and an impacts analysis for the

Project.

The Project Site is located at 9534 Reseda Boulevard in the City of Los Angeles, as shown in

Figure 1, Regional Map. The Project Site is bordered by Halsted Street to the north, Darby

Avenue to the east, and Plummer Street to the south, as shown in Figure 2, Aerial Photograph,

and is currently developed with a single-story Mid-Century Modern post office (“Building”)

constructed circa 1961.

PROJECTSITE

9534 Reseda Boulevard, Los AngelesFigure 1

Regional and Project Vicinity MapSOURCE: ESRI Street Map, 2009.

Project Site0 300

Feet

PROJECTSITE

9534 Reseda Boulevard, Los AngelesFigure 2

Aerial Photograph of Project Site and VicinitySOURCE: Google Maps, 2015 (Aerial).

Project Site0 100

Feet


I. Introduction

9534 Reseda Boulevard 4 ESA PCR


Although the Building is associated with historic themes like Post-War Suburban Development

(1945-1980); Post Office Facilities after World War II (1945-1970); the work of architect

Maxwell Starkman (1956-2004); and Mid-Century Modernism (1945-1970), it does not appear to

possess significant associations within those themes as an individual resource. While SurveyLA

identified the subject property as potentially significant, citing it as “an excellent example of a

1960s post office in Northridge that reflects its suburb’s expanding population and rising demand

for government services after World War II” and as “a building exhibiting the design features and

building standards commonly applied to federal postal facilities built in the postwar era,”1 based

upon further evaluation, ESA PCR found substantial evidence to show the subject property does

not meet the eligibility requirements as a historical resource, as summarized below and

documented in detail in this Report.

Built in 1961, the Building was one of many Mid-Century Modern style institutional facilities and

United States Postal Service (“USPS”) post offices constructed in the San Fernando Valley

during the Post-War era. It replaced a post office designed to serve one route; within months of

opening, the new Building was already serving 22 routes demonstrating the tidal wave of

suburbanization already underway in the community. It was constructed in the midst of the area’s

suburbanizing phenomenon and therefore, its construction does not appear to have influenced a

development trend in the area nor is it representative of a significant pattern of development.

Additionally, the Building does not appear to be associated with any significant personages.

While it is one of the many Mid-Century Modern style institutional facilities and post offices

constructed in Northridge and throughout the San Fernando Valley, no aspect of the Building’s

design appears revolutionary or influential to the Mid-Century style of architecture. The Building

is not a representative example of its type or method of construction. The San Fernando Valley

has other post offices built in the same period as part of the USPS lease-to-purchase “Thousands

Series” program that use the same material palette and design aesthetic and are also better

examples of their type. Furthermore, the Building is not and has never been government owned

by the USPS or any government-owned agency. The Building was constructed by a private

developer as an income-producing property for lease and was never purchased by the USPS. The

Building’s architect, Maxwell Starkman, was known for his cost-effective approach to building

design. He utilized cheap materials with simple functional designs that could be constructed

quickly. Starkman and his firm were responsible for the design and construction of thousands of

single-family residences as well as commercial, institutional, and government buildings. The

Building is a basic utilitarian design of economical construction and materials that does not best

represent Starkman’s creative capabilities as an architect, but rather shows Starkman’s adherence

to USPS design guidelines; therefore, the Building is not a notable work of a master architect. It

follows USPS design guidelines and is neither a creative nor distinctive work of architecture.

Finally, alterations to the entrance court including replacement of the original redwood screen

with the existing metal screen, new concrete paving and accessibility upgrades substantially

compromise the integrity of the primary façade. Therefore, the Building is ineligible for

individual listing under any federal, state and local eligibility criterion and ESA PCR

1 SurveyLA, Historic Resources Survey Report, Northridge Community Plan Area, “Individual Resources” as of 7/9/15

(ARG).


I. Introduction



recommends the subject property should be assigned a CHR status code of 6z, “found ineligible

for the National Register, California Register, and local designation through survey evaluation.”

Because the building does not qualify as a historical resource under CEQA, Project

implementation, which would involve demolition of the Building, would have no direct impact on

historical resources on the Project Site. Furthermore, no historic resources were identified within

a quarter mile radius, other than the California State University, Northridge (“CSUN”) campus,

which was identified as a potential resource in SurveyLA. However, SurveyLA gave the CSUN

campus a CHR status code of QQQ, requiring further evaluation. Furthermore, the CSUN campus

would have no view of the Project Site. Because no historic resources were found on the Project

Site or surrounding area, ESA PCR determined that the Project would not cause any direct or

indirect impacts to historic resources.

B. Research and Field Methodology

This Report was conducted by ESA PCR’s Historical Resources Division personnel, including

Margarita C. Jerabek, Ph.D., Director of Historic Resources, Amanda Y. Kainer, M.S., Senior

Architectural Historian, Christian Taylor, M.H.P., Associate Architectural Historian, and

Stephanie C. Hodal, Candidate M.H.C., Intern Architectural Historian, all of whom meet and

exceed the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in history and

architectural history. Professional qualifications are provided in Appendix A.

The historical resources evaluation involved a review of the National Register (“National Register

of Historic Places” or “NR”) and its annual updates, the California Register of Historical

Resources (“California Register” or “CR”), the Statewide Historical Resources Inventory (HRI)

database maintained by the State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) and the California

Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), and the City of Los Angeles’s inventory of

historic properties to identify any previously recorded properties within or near the Project Site,

as well as environmental review assessments for other projects in the vicinity. An intensive

pedestrian survey was also undertaken to document the existing conditions of the property and

Project vicinity. In addition, the following tasks were performed for the study:

Searched records of the National Register, California Register, California Historical

Resources Inventory Database, and City of Los Angeles City Historic‐Cultural

Monuments designations.

Conducted field inspections of the study area, and utilized the survey methodology of the

State OHP.

Photographed the Project Site, and examined other properties in the area that exhibited

potential architectural and/or historical associations.

Conducted site‐specific research on the property utilizing building permits, Sanborn fire

insurance maps, City directories, historical photographs, University of Southern

California (USD) Digital Collections, historical Los Angeles Times and Van Nuys News

and Valley Green Sheet, and other published sources. Conducted research at the City of

Los Angeles Department of Building, the Los Angeles Public Library, and the CSUN


I. Introduction



Oviatt Library. Communicated with the archives at the USPS for information on the

subject property, design manuals, and Postmaster General Reports.

Conducted a windshield survey of other Post-War post offices located and government

building located in the San Fernando Valley and prepared a list of post offices identified

in SurveyLA.

Reviewed and analyzed ordinances, statutes, regulations, bulletins, and technical

materials relating to federal, state, and local historic preservation, designation assessment

processes, and related programs.

Utilized the applicable Context/Theme/Property Type eligibility standards formulated for

SurveyLA.

Evaluated potential historical resources based upon criteria used by the National Register,

California Register, and City of Los Angeles Cultural Heritage Ordinance.

Assessed the Project against the CEQA thresholds for determining the significance of

impacts to historical resources.



II. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Historical resources fall within the jurisdiction of several levels of government. Federal laws

provide the framework for the identification, and in certain instances, protection of historical

resources. Additionally, state and local jurisdictions play active roles in the identification,

documentation, and protection of such resources within their communities. The National Historic

Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended and the California Public Resources Code (PRC),

Section 5024.1, are the primary federal and state laws and regulations governing the evaluation

and significance of historical resources of national, state, regional, and local importance.

Descriptions of these relevant laws and regulations are presented below.

A. Federal Level

1. National Register of Historic Places

The National Register was established by the NHPA as “an authoritative guide to be used by

federal, state, and local governments, private groups and citizens to identify the Nation’s cultural

resources and to indicate what properties should be considered for protection from destruction or

impairment.”2 The National Register recognizes properties that are significant at the national,

state, and/or local levels.

To be eligible for listing in the National Register, a resource must be significant in American

history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture. Four criteria for evaluation have been

established to determine the significance of a resource:

A. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns

of our history;

B. It is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past;

C. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or

that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a

significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction;

D. It yields, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.3

Districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are 50 years in age must meet one or more

of the above criteria and retain integrity (that is, convey their significance) to be eligible for

listing. Under the National Register, a property can be significant not only for the way it was

2 36 CFR Section 60.2. 3 “Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms,” in National Register Bulletin 16, U.S. Department of

Interior, National Park Service, September 30, 1986. This bulletin contains technical information on comprehensive planning, survey of cultural resources and registration in the NRHP.


II. Regulatory Framework



originally constructed, but also for the way it was adapted at a later period, or for the way it

illustrates changing tastes, attitudes, and uses over a period of time.4

Within the concept of integrity, the National Register recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, in

various combinations, define integrity: Location, Design, Setting, Materials, Workmanship,

Feeling, and Association:

1. Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the

historic event occurred. The relationship between the property and its location is often

important to understanding why the property was created or why something happened. The

actual location of a historic property, complemented by its setting, is particularly important in

recapturing the sense of historic events and persons. Except in rare cases, the relationship

between a property and its historic associations is destroyed if the property is moved.

2. Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of

a property. It results from conscious decisions made during the original conception and

planning of a property (or its significant alteration) and applies to activities as diverse as

community planning, engineering, architecture, and landscape architecture. Design includes

such elements as organization of space, proportion, scale, technology, ornamentation, and

materials. A property’s design reflects historic functions and technologies as well as

aesthetics. It includes such considerations as the structural system; massing; arrangement of

spaces; pattern of fenestration; textures and colors of surface materials; type, amount and

style of ornamental detailing; and arrangement and type of plantings in a designed landscape.

3. Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. Whereas location refers to the

specific place where a property was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character

of the place in which the property played its historic role. It involves how, not just where, the

property is situated and its relationship to surrounding features and open space.

4. Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during

any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans’ labor and skill in

constructing or altering a building, structure, object, or site. Workmanship can apply to the

property as a whole or to its individual components.

5. Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular

period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. The

choice and combination of materials reveal the preferences of those who created the property

and indicate the availability of particular types of materials and technologies. A property

must retain key exterior materials dating from the period of its historic significance.

6. Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of

time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the

property’s historic character.

7. Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic

property. A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred

and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer.5

4 National Register Bulletin 15, p. 19.





To retain historic integrity, a property will always possess most of the aspects and depending

upon its significance, retention of specific aspects of integrity may be paramount for a property to

convey its significance.6 Determining which of these aspects are most important to a particular

property requires knowing why, where and when a property is significant.7 For properties that

are considered significant under National Register Criteria A and B, National Register Bulletin

15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (“National Register Bulletin 15”)

explains, “a property that is significant for its historic association is eligible if it retains the

essential physical features that made up its character or appearance during the period of its

association with the important event, historical pattern, or person(s).”8 In assessing the integrity

of properties that are considered significant under National Register Criterion C, National

Register Bulletin 15 states, “a property important for illustrating a particular architectural style or

construction technique must retain most of the physical features that constitute that style or

technique.”9

B. State Level

1. California Register of Historical Resources

The Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), as an office of the California Department of Parks and

Recreation (DPR), implements the policies of the NHPA on a statewide level. The OHP also

carries out the duties as set forth in the PRC and maintains the HRI and the California Register.

The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) is an appointed official who implements historic

preservation programs within the state’s jurisdictions. Also implemented at the state level,

CEQA requires projects to identify any substantial adverse impacts which may affect the

significance of identified historical resources.

The California Register was created by Assembly Bill 2881 which was signed into law on

September 27, 1992. The California Register is “an authoritative listing and guide to be used by

state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens in identifying the existing historical

resources of the state and to indicate which resources deserve to be protected, to the extent

5 National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, 44-45,

http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/pdfs/nrb15.pdf, accessed July 7, 2013. 6 The National Register defines a property as an “area of land containing a single historic resource or a group of

resources, and constituting a single entry in the National Register of Historic Places.” A “Historic Property” is defined as “any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object at the time it attained historic significance.” Glossary of National Register Terms, http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb16a/nrb16a_appendix_IV.htm, accessed June 1, 2013.

7 National Register Bulletin 15, p. 44. 8 “A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to

convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property’s historic character. Because feeling and association depend on individual perceptions, their retention alone is never sufficient to support eligibility of a property for the National Register.” Ibid, p. 46.

9 “A property that has lost some historic materials or details can be eligible if it retains the majority of the features that illustrate its style in terms of the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, pattern of windows and doors, texture of materials, and ornamentation. The property is not eligible, however, if it retains some basic features conveying massing but has lost the majority of the features that once characterized its style.” Ibid.





prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change.”10 The criteria for eligibility for the

California Register are based upon National Register criteria.11

The California Register consists of resources that are listed automatically and those that must be

nominated through an application and public hearing process. The California Register

automatically includes the following:

California properties listed on the National Register and those formally Determined

Eligible for the National Register; 12

California Registered Historical Landmarks from No. 770 onward;

Those Points of Historical Interest that have been evaluated by the OHP and have been

recommended to the State Historical Commission for inclusion on the California

Register.13

Other resources which may be nominated to the California Register include:

Individual historical resources;

Historical resources contributing to historic districts;

Historical resources identified as significant in historical resources surveys with

significance ratings of Category 1 through 5;

Historical resources designated or listed as local landmarks, or designated under any local

ordinance, such as an HPOZ.14

To be eligible for the California Register, a historical resource must be significant at the local,

state, or national level, under one or more of the following four criteria:

1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of

California's history and cultural heritage;

2. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past;

3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction,

or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or

4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Additionally, a historical resource eligible for listing in the California Register must meet one or

more of the criteria of significance described above and retain enough of its historic character or

appearance to be recognizable as a historical resource and to convey the reasons for its

10 PRC Section 5024.1(a). 11 PRC Section 5024.1(b). 12 PRC Section 5024.1(d). 13 Ibid. 14 PRC Section 5024.1(e)





significance. Historical resources that have been rehabilitated or restored may be evaluated for

listing. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of seven aspects of integrity similar to

the National Register (location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association).

Also like the National Register, it must also be judged with reference to the particular criteria

under which a resource is proposed for eligibility. Alterations over time to a resource or historic

changes in its use may themselves have historical, cultural, or architectural significance. It is

possible that historical resources may not retain sufficient integrity to meet the criteria for listing

in the National Register, but they may still be eligible for listing in the California Register. A

resource that has lost its historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for the

California Register if it maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical

information or specific data.15

2. California Office of Historic Preservation Survey Methodology

The evaluation instructions and classification system prescribed by the California OHP in its

manual, Instructions for Recording Historical Resources (March 1995) provide a three-digit

evaluation rating code (“Status Code”) for use in classifying potential historical resources. The

first digit indicates one of the following general evaluation categories for use in conducting

cultural resources surveys:

1. Listed on the National Register or the California Register;

2. Determined eligible for listing in the National Register or the California Register;

3. Appears eligible for the National Register or the California Register through survey

evaluation;

4. Appears eligible for the National Register or the California Register through other evaluation;

5. Recognized as Historically Significant by Local Government;

6. Not eligible for any Listing or Designation; and

7. Not evaluated for the National Register or California Register or needs re‐evaluation.

The second digit of the Status Code is a letter code indicating whether the resource is separately

eligible (S), eligible as part of a district (D), or both (B). The third digit is a number that is used

to further specify significance and refine the relationship of the property to the National Register

and/or California Register. Under this evaluation system, categories 1 through 4 pertain to

various levels of National Register and California Register eligibility. Locally eligible resources

are given a rating code level 5. Properties found ineligible for listing in the National Register,

California Register, or for designation under a local ordinance are given an evaluation Status

15 Codified in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 11.5, Section 4852(c) which can be accessed on the

internet at http://ohp.parks.ca.gov





Code of 6. Properties given an evaluation Status Code of 6Z are “found ineligible for the

National Register, California Register, or Local designation through survey evaluation.”16

C. Local Level

1. City of Los Angeles

The City enacted a Cultural Heritage Ordinance in April 1962 which defines Historic-Cultural

Monuments. According to the Ordinance, Historic-Cultural Monuments are sites, buildings, or

structures of particular historic or cultural significance to the City in which the broad cultural,

political, or social history of the nation, state, or City is reflected or exemplified, including sites

and buildings associated with important personages or which embody certain distinguishing

architectural characteristics and are associated with a notable architect. These Historic-Cultural

Monuments are regulated by the City’s Cultural Heritage Commission and the City Council.

a. Los Angeles Cultural Heritage Ordinance

The Los Angeles Cultural Heritage Ordinance (Los Angeles Administrative Code, Chapter 9,

Division 22, Article 1, Section 22.171.7) establishes criteria for designating local historical

resources as Historic-Cultural Monuments. A Historic-Cultural Monument is any site (including

significant trees or other plant life located on the site), building or structure or particular historic

or cultural significance to the City of Los Angeles, such as historic structures or sites:

In which the broad cultural, economic or social history of the nation, state or community

is reflected or exemplified;

Which are identified with historic personages or with important events in the main

currents of national, state or local history;

Which embody the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural type specimen,

inherently valuable for a study of a period, style or method of construction; or

Which are a notable work of a master builder, designer, or architect whose individual

genius influenced his or her age.

A proposed resource may be eligible for designation if it meets at least one of the criteria above.

When determining historic significance and evaluating a resource against the Cultural Heritage

Ordinance criteria above, the Cultural Heritage Commission and the staff of the Office of Historic

Resources often ask the following questions:

Is the site or structure an outstanding example of past architectural styles or

craftsmanship?

Was the site or structure created by a “master” architect, builder, or designer?

16 Ibid.





Did the architect, engineer, or owner have historical associations that either influenced

architecture in the City or had a role in the development or history of Los Angeles?

Has the building retained “integrity”? Does it still convey its historic significance

through the retention of its original design and materials?

Is the site or structure associated with important historic events or historic personages

that shaped the growth, development, or evolution of Los Angeles or its communities?

Is the site or structure associated with important movements or trends that shaped the

social and cultural history of Los Angeles or its communities?17

With regard to integrity, the seven aspects of integrity of the National Register and California

Register are the same and the threshold of integrity for individual eligibility is similar. However,

the threshold of integrity for Historic Preservation Overlay Zones (HPOZs) is lower; a

contributing structure in an HPOZ is a building that was constructed during the predominant

period of development in the neighborhood and that has retained most of its historic features.

17 What Makes a Resource Historically Significant? City of LA Office of Historic Preservation,

http://preservation.lacity.org/commission/what-makes-resource-historically-significant, accessed July 7, 2013.



III. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

A. Historic Context

The historic context developed below presents the background necessary to fully evaluate the

historical and architectural significance of the post office facility located at 9534 Reseda

Boulevard within the Project Site, including the construction and alterations history, and the

history of the surrounding community development. The period of significance associated with

9534 Reseda Boulevard is 1961, the Building’s date of construction. Research indicates the

property is associated with the following historical and architectural themes: Post-War Suburban

Development (1945-1980); Post Office Facilities after World War II (1945-1970); Architect

Maxwell Starkman (1956-2004); and Mid-Century Modernism (1945-1970).

1. Post-War Suburban Development - Northridge (1945-1980)18

The area now known as Northridge was established in 1910 as the town of Zelzah. In 1915,

Zelzah was incorporated into the City of Los Angeles and continued to serve as an agricultural

community (Figures 3 and 4). The vast acreage surrounding the town was used to cultivate a

variety of crops including sizable yields of walnuts, oranges, lemons, lima beans, lettuce,

peaches, figs, and apricots.19 A notable local industry was the H.J. Heinz Company. In 1924,

Heinz planted the area with hundreds of acres of cucumbers that were used to produce the

company’s signature dill pickles and pickle relish.20

Figure 3 (Left). Aerial view of Zelzah (Northridge), circa 1918 (Los Angeles Public Library)

Figure 4 (Right). View of a city street in Zelzah, Date unknown (Los Angeles Public Library)

18 Historic Resources Survey Report: Northridge Community Plan Area. Prepared for the City of Los Angeles,

Department of City Planning, Office of Historic Resources by Architectural Resources Group, Inc. July 9, 2015. 19 “Northward Over the Foothills,” Los Angeles Times, January 2, 1930. 20 “Pickle Plant Planned,” Los Angeles Times, January 3, 1924.


III. Environmental Setting



In 1929, the community was renamed North Los Angeles; however, the new name was confusing

because the neighborhood was located 25 miles from central Los Angeles. In 1938, the name was

changed once again to Northridge Village and later shortened to Northridge. Despite the name

changes, Northridge remained a rural community focused on agricultural industries. Due to the

rural nature of the community, Northridge attracted many celebrities looking to escape the

frenzied atmosphere of Hollywood and Los Angeles.

Figure 5 (Left). Reseda Boulevard, circa 1956 (Los Angeles Public Library)

Figure 6 (Right). Aerial view of Northridge, circa 1960 (Los Angeles Public Library)

In the 1940s, Northridge’s cultural identity shifted toward equestrianism. Large horse ranches

consumed the one time agricultural fields. Starting in 1948, the local chamber of commerce

hosted an annual equestrian parade and horse show known as the Northridge Stampede, where

cowboy star and resident celebrity Montie Montana – who also served as the town’s honorary

mayor – would regularly appear.21

During the Post-War period, Northridge’s identity would once again change. The wide open

farmland of the San Fernando Valley soon gave way to real estate development in support of an

exponentially increasing population (Figures 5 and 6). Northridge was no different than the other

valley communities. The area’s wide expanses of farm and ranch lands were well-suited to

neighborhoods of mass-produced single-family houses, which were developed in earnest to

accommodate an influx of households in search of a middle-class, suburban lifestyle. Rapid

residential development was accompanied by the rise of various commercial and institutional

uses, which arose to serve the day-to-day needs of the area’s steadily increasing population. In

1956, the San Fernando Valley State University (known today as California State University,

Northridge) opened its doors to residents seeking higher education (Figure 7).

21 Kevin Roderick, The San Fernando Valley: America’s Suburb (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Times Books, 2002), 93.





Figure 7 (Left). Construction of the San Fernando Valley State University’s campus, 1956 (Los Angeles Public

Library)

To accommodate the area’s rapid population growth, government services were constructed

throughout Northridge in the Post-War era. New services supporting the community included

Department of Water and Power facilities, fire stations, a post office and new schools.

2. Post Office Facilities after World War II (1945-1970)22

The USPS experienced multiple periods of expansion in the 20th century, responding to the

growth of Federal services, an increasing and dispersing population, changes in technology, and

the emergence of both an automobile culture and the national highway system. Numerous Public

Works Administration era post offices were built during the Great Depression; during World War

II and in the immediate Post-War period these were modified and expanded to house new

machinery and increasing volume; suburbanization from the late 1950s into the early 1970s was

addressed by an extensive building program using an innovative privately financed lease-

purchase strategy in which the USPS leased facilities built and owned by private developers for

up to 30-year terms.

The Postal Modernization Act of 1958 laid the groundwork for updating the USPS’s physical

facilities, processes, and capacity nationwide. In 1959, the lease-purchase program was approved

to undertake a multi-year $1.5 billion building program. This initiated the rapid construction of

facilities in the exploding suburbs in what was called the “Thousands Series” program – buildings

ranging in size from 1,000 to 12,000 square feet.

To ensure that its needs were met in these leased buildings, the USPS issued a number of

guidance documents that outlined design and technical specifications, including the Building

Designs Manual (1959), Construction Requirements for Leased Postal Facilities (1959), Bidders

Instructions (1959), and Standard Details for Building Construction, and POD Publication 41

22 USPS Nationwide Historic Context Study: Postal Facilities Constructed or Occupied Between 1940 and 1971.

Prepared for the U.S. Postal Service by URS Group Inc. September 2012.





(1960). These documents contained artist’s renderings, schematic plans, suggested materials, and

detailed the expectations for post offices down to the chrome plating on the lock boxes, the

number of coats of primer and the paint color to use on the flagpole, and the call bell to be

installed in the workroom. The brochures noted that the designs were adaptable to many

variations and site characteristics because exterior design and materials could be adjusted to suit

local conditions, climates, and geographical areas in the United States.

The image of these 1,000 to12,000 square-foot “Thousands Series” buildings was specified in the

Building Designs Manual, a document that reflected then Postmaster General Arthur

Summerfield’s desire for modern buildings focusing on efficiency and clean lines. Building

Designs featured two styles of post office, International style and a streamlined Colonial Revival

style, both detailed to guarantee low material costs. International style designs suggested

rectilinear and box-shaped forms with flat roofs and overhanging canopies, large metal-framed

plate glass windows and brick or concrete facades with offset or recessed entries. The

International Style was suggested for commercial areas and the Colonial Revival style for

residential areas.

All floor plans within the “Thousands Series”, regardless of style, contained a post office box

lobby with boxes and mail drop, a post office customer service lobby with counters, a lockable

partition between the two lobbies, a work room, storage, men and women’s bathrooms, and a rear

vestibule with a canopy and truck platform. Larger post offices of this type may also have had

offices, a vault, a lookout gallery, and a mechanical equipment room. All of the designs were one

story.

The model buildings had limited or no setbacks and locations on arterial roads rather than on

main street central business districts. All designs included a new feature: site arrangements to

provide access for maneuvering and parking postal trucks and room for patron parking.

Typically the resulting buildings were not designed by architects but by the construction

contractor using the brochure renderings and guidelines for reference. The manual was reissued

in 1964 relatively unchanged and influenced the design of post offices into the 1970s.

The government’s preferred version of the International Style used masonry and concrete

construction rather than glass and steel, because the masonry was thought to communicate

responsible spending, strength, and dependability. The result of the increased emphasis on

modern design principles in federal buildings resulted in the erection of buildings that looked far

more like the private-sector commercial office buildings of their time than the monumental

governmental buildings common before World War II.

The subject property was part of the “Thousands Series” initiative and was planned according to a

Building Designs prototype. However, unlike many of the “Thousand Series” facilities, the

Building had the involvement of an architect, Maxwell Starkman, a local Southern California

architect. Maxwell Starkman adhered to the USPS design guidelines with some design creativity

revealed most strongly in the screened entry and recessed landscaped courtyard; however, both of

these design elements are now both highly altered. Noted as a developers’ architect, the Building

represents Maxwell Starkman’s ethos of ‘architecture for investment.’ The new post office





(Building) was also typical of the modern commercial and institutional buildings being

introduced in Northridge at the time, encouraged by area’s Chamber of Commerce that

envisioned a modern image for the neighborhood’s future in keeping with the buildings then in

construction at Valley State College (now CSUN).23

The subject property replaced a 1952 Northridge post office located further south at 8661 Reseda

Boulevard, and provided additional processing and customer service capacity for the area’s

increasing population. The new post office was three times larger than its 1952 predecessor

designed to serve one route; the new post office was serving 22 routes upon opening. In 1961,

the then new building was located in the midst of agricultural parcels that were transitioning

quickly to commercial use along and housing use behind this section of Reseda Boulevard.

The following table shows thirteen post offices constructed in the San Fernando Valley, between

1933 and 1979 including ten which were built in the Post-War era in response to the building

boom. Some of the post offices presented in Table 1 have been identified as potentially eligible

for the National Register, California Register, and/or local designation as a City of Los Angeles

Historic-Cultural Monument by SurveyLA while others have not been evaluated. Provided in

Table 2 are six post offices constructed between 1934 and 1960 identified in SurveyLA, among

which four are Mid-Century Modern style examples.

TABLE 1 POST OFFICE IN THE SAN FERNANDO VALLEY

Address Dates SurveyLA Photograph

11304 Chandler Blvd

North Hollywood, Ca 91601

1933 Individually Eligible: NR, CR, HCM (3S; 3CS; 5S3)

14530 W Sylvan Street


23 “College May Set Tone in Northridge,” Los Angeles Times, August 6, 1961.






21801 Sherman Way

Canoga Park, Ca 91303-9998


7320 Reseda Blvd

Reseda, Ca 91335-9998

1955 Not Identified by SurveyLA

7035 Laurel Canyon Boulevard

North Hollywood, Ca 91605


13507 Van Nuys Blvd

Pacoima, Ca 91331


10919 Sepulveda Blvd

San Fernando, Ca 91345







10946 Ratner Street

Sun Valley, Ca 91352


8587 Fenwick St

Sunland-Tujunga, Ca 91040

1966 Individually Eligible: CR, HCM (3CS; 5S3)

14416 Chase St

Panorama City, Ca 91402


3950 Laurel Canyon Blvd

Studio City, Ca 91604


22121 Clarendon St

Woodland Hills, Ca 91367-9998







101 S Topanga Canyon Blvd

Topanga, Ca 90290-9998


TABLE 2 POST OFFICES IN LOS ANGELES IDENTIFIED IN SURVEYLA


200 E Anaheim Street

1934 Individually Eligible: NR, CR, HCM (3S, 3CS; 5S3)

1601 Main Street 1939 Individually

Eligible: NR, CR, HCM (3S, 3CS; 5S3)

11420 Santa Monica Blvd /1622 S Butler Avenue







3740 S Motor Avenue


3883 S Bronson Avenue


10946 W Ratner Street


3. Mid-Century Modernism (1945-1970)

In the post-World War II period in America, Modern architecture became the predominant

architectural style applied to buildings of every type. During the 1950s and 1960s, distinct and

identifiable stylistic variants of Modernism evolved. The aesthetic closest to the 1920s origins of

Modernism in Europe was dubbed the International Style and was identified by its rectilinear

form, flat roofs, open floor plans, use of steel and glass, and lack of applied ornamentation. Local

variants of Modern design, while based upon International Style tenets, were generally less

formal in their expression of Modernist tenets with results that vary widely in terms of materials,

form, and spatial arrangements. Mid-Century Modern architecture is more organic and less

doctrinaire than the International Style. It is characterized by more solid wall surfaces and

emphasis is often placed on stylized architectural focal points/features.

Mid-Century Modern design used sleek, simplified geometry and asymmetrical, intersecting

angular planes of masonry volumes and glass curtain walls, locked together by a flat planar roof.

Designers embraced the optimistic spirit of the time, experimenting with the newest technologies

and materials in building, such as concrete and aluminum, and incorporating futuristic elements.

The features of the Mid-Century Modern style are simple geometric forms, post-and-beam





construction, flat or low-pitched gabled roofs, flush mounted steel framed windows or large

single-paned wood-framed windows, and brick or stone often used as primary accent material.

Mid-Century Modernism is a new and rapidly evolving research field in architectural history and

historic preservation about which relatively little is currently known as compared with the early

twentieth-century Period Revival, for example. Mid-Century Modern residential resources are

currently in the process of being documented and evaluated through SurveyLA. In addition,

advocacy groups such as the LA Conservancy’s Modern Committee have been championing

LA’s Modern Architecture since 1984.24 Most recently, Curating the City: Modern Architecture

in L.A. was part of Pacific Standard Time Presents: Modern Architecture in L.A., a collaboration,

initiated by the Getty, bringing together seventeen cultural institutions from April through July

2013 for a wide-ranging look at the postwar built environment of Los Angeles as a whole, from

its famous residential architecture to its vast freeway network, revealing the city’s development

and ongoing impact in new ways.

The character-defining features of the Mid-Century Modern style include:

Flat or low-pitched gabled roofs

Flush mounted steel framed windows

Simple geometric forms

Post-and-beam construction

Unornamented wall surfaces

Horizontal massing

4. Maxwell Starkman (1956-2004)

The architect, Maxwell Starkman was a respected and accomplished designer (Figure 8). A

graduate of the University of Manitoba, he worked for Richard Neutra in the early 1950s before

starting his own firm. He led a large and successful practice with a portfolio containing the

buildings of the Southland’s epic growth -- thousands of single-family tract homes and low and

high-rise apartment buildings, hotels, offices, and industrial facilities along with the new civic

buildings to serve that population. At the firm’s 30th anniversary in 1983, the practice was

ranked 98th among Engineering News Record magazine’s Top 400 grossing A/E firms in the

nation and as the country’s fourth-largest purely architectural practice in Building Design and

Construction magazine’s annual survey.

24 See Curating the City: Modern Architecture in L.A. (https://www.laconservancy.org/modern, accessed 1/29/2015).

https://www.laconservancy.org/modern





Figure 8. Maxwell Starkman, date unknown

(Los Angeles Times)

His career was capped by designs for the Simon Wiesenthal Center Museum of Tolerance and the

Sony Pictures Plaza. Starkman was a developer’s architect specializing in “ ‘architecture for

investment’ – combining design, materials, and construction methods to complete projects

quickly and return speedy profits to investors.”25

In addition to the Northridge post office facility, Starkman designed two other post offices in the

same time period, both built with Wagner Construction as part of the “Thousands Series”

program. One was located in Lancaster, CA (1961)26 (Figure 9) and the other in La Puente

(1962)27 (Figure 10). All three post offices were in the Mid-Century Modern style and used a

general layout and material palette in keeping with the USPS guidelines: they were low

horizontal buildings along major boulevards rendered in concrete and masonry with flat roofs and

large expanses of metal-framed glass doors and windows. At each, small additional details

elevated the quality of design, specifically the unique screened and landscaped entry court at

Northridge, the addition of decorative mosaic panels at Lancaster, and the inclusion of a

transparent glass façade with masonry accent panel and planting beds at La Puente.

25 Maxwell Starkman Obituary. Los Angeles Times. January 5, 2004. 26 “Mosaic Tile Panels, Creen Add Color to Branch Office,” Los Angeles Times, October 1, 1961. 27 “Branch Post Office Slated,” Los Angeles Times, October 29, 1961.





Figure 9. U. S. Post Office in Lancaster, California, designed by Maxwell Starkman and Associates in 1961 with

Wagner Construction.

Figure 10. U. S. Post Office in La Puente, California, designed by Maxwell Starkman and Associates in 1962

with Wagner Construction





5. Construction History of 9534 Reseda Boulevard

a. Construction History

The Valley’s rapid growth created the need for more post office capacity. Northridge’s

previously existing post office (1952) located at 8661 Reseda, at the boulevard’s intersection with

Parthenia Street, had reached its maximum processing volume and was “breaking at the seams at

its present location.”28 In May of 1960, the Postmaster General approved construction of a new

facility planned to be 12,000 square feet at a cost of $120,000. The new facility was to be located

approximately one mile north at 9524 Reseda Boulevard. On July 1, 1960, construction bids were

due for the new building.29 To prepare the site, permits show that an existing family dwelling,

garage, and playhouse built in the early 1950s were removed and relocated to a different address.

Building permits for the post office project were issued on February 3, 1961 to Wagner

Construction Company, listed as the owner and contractor. The permit also listed architect

Maxwell Starkman (Maxwell Starkman & Associates) and engineer Paul Greenfield. The permits

valued the project at $97,000 with an added $500 for a flagpole. Groundbreaking for the new

facility was celebrated by a ceremony on February 2, 1961 (Figures 11 and 12).

Figure 11 (Left). Groundbreaking for the new Northridge Post Office, Valley News February 2, 1961

Note: the photograph is as it was found in the Valley Times Collection, Los Angeles Public Library and was not

altered by the authors of this report. (Valley Times Collection, Los Angeles Public Library)

Figure 12 (Right). Dedication of Northridge Post Office, Valley News, July 11, 1961 (Valley Times Collection,

Los Angeles Public Library)

28 “Northridge Gets Post Office OK.” Los Angeles Times, May 8, 1960. 29 “Northridge Post Office Bids Due.” Los Angeles Times, June 30, 1960





Figure 13. Aerial view of the Subject Property, 1957 (Historic Aerials)

The start of construction was announced in the Los Angeles Times on March 5, 1961 for a

building to be completed by July 1 with a budget set at $250,000.30 On Saturday, July 8, 1961,

the completed post office was dedicated with an opening address presented by Dr. Ralph Prator,

president of the recently opened Valley State College (California State University, Northridge).31

On October 8, 1961, the Los Angeles Times described the new post office as having an “open

entry court, flanked by brick panels… hidden from street view by a redwood screen.” 32 However,

it appears that what was described as a redwood screen, the design focal point, has been removed

and replaced by the current metal screen. The new 1961 postal facility featured an arrangement of

sheer glass aluminum framed panels beneath plaster spandrels at the entry with simple rear and

side walls of concrete block. The facility was air conditioned and fitted with composition tile

flooring, acoustical tile ceilings, and recessed fluorescent lighting. Furnishings were noted as

contemporary in design with the latest mail handling equipment provided. The grounds were

landscaped to “contribute to the clean-cut structural lines.” Within five months of opening, the

new post office had increased processing volume by 15%, close to one million pieces.33

30 “Construction of Northridge Post Office Started.” Los Angeles Times, March 5, 1961. 31 “Post Office to be Dedicated.” Los Angeles Times, July 6, 1961. 32 “Entry Court Screen Features of Branch.” Los Angeles Times, October 8, 1961. 33 “Northridge Post Office Shows Gain.” Los Angeles Times, November 19, 1961.





Figure 14. Aerial view of the Subject Property in 1967 (Historic Aerials)

Only two permits were issued for modifications to the subject property after 1961: in 1992 the

post office was re-roofed and, in 1995, it appears that it was brought into alignment with ADA

regulations with changes to handrails, bathrooms, the path of travel, and restriping in the parking

lot to identify handicapped parking areas.

The building permit history of the the subject property is summarized in Tables 3A, 3B, and 3C,

below. Table 3A chronicles changes to the subject property before construction of the post office,

Table 3B documents the post office construction and alterations, and Table 3C details site

improvements of the southern part of the parcel in 2005. Based upon the permit history it

appears that the Building retains integrity and has undergone only minor alterations for

maintenance and code compliance purposes including replacement of the roof and

accessiblity/path of travel upgrades.





TABLE 3A 9534 RESEDA BOULEVARD BUILDING PERMITS – SITE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF POST OFFICE 1950-1961

Issued Permit# Owner

Architect/

Engineer Contractor Valuation Description

8/30/1950 1950VN17632 Raymond E. and (illegible) Burdick

none owner $15,000 Dwelling: 50 x 72 x 1 story on 100 x 290 lot. Redwood siding with shake roof.

8/30/1950 1950VN17633 Raymond E. and (illegible) Burdick

none owner $2,700 Garage: 24 x 36 x 1 story on 100 x 290 lot. Redwood siding with shake roof.

3/13/1952 1952VN22950 Raymond E. Burdick none owner $11,800 Complete work started on 1950VN 41825. Existing is listed as garage and guest house and dwelling with 6 rooms.

3/13/1952 1952VN22959 Raymond E. Burdick none owner $51 Complete work started on permit 1950VN17633 (garage and guest house)

1/12/1961 1961VN72131 Theodore

Hain

none Owner #4 $4000 Relocate family dwelling 72’2” x 51’1” to 9808 Farralone Avenue.

1/12/1961 1961VN72132 Theodore

Hain

none Owner #5 $800 Relocate garage and playroom 36 x 24 to 9808 Farralone Avenue.





TABLE 3B 9534 RESEDA BOULEVARD BUILDING PERMITS – POST OFFICE 1961-1995

TABLE 3C 9534 RESEDA BOULEVARD BUILDING PERMITS – SITE DEVELOPMENT 1995-2005


Architect/


2/3/1961 1961VN73466 Wagner Construction

Maxwell Starkman (A), Paul Greenfield (E)

Wagner Construction

$97,000 U.S. Post Office: 145 x 90 on 140.3 x 280.1 lot. 14,000sf with 28 parking spaces.

2/3/1961 1961VN73467 Wagner Construction

Maxwell Starkman (A), Paul Greenfield (E)

Wagner Construction

$500 Flag pole.

10/30/1992 1992VN14890 Interprise Management

Cal-Tech Roofing

$19,600 Reroof with built up roof Class A/B, 2

nd layer 169

squares.

9/26/1995 1995VN89768 U. S. Postal Service

Barton Choy

D. L. Kaufman

$40,000 DAD (sic) upgrade, handrail, bathrooms (2), path of travel, and restripe for handicapped parking.


Architect/


11/16/2005 05010-10000-02947

Anthony and Joann Fanticola Family LP

Studio 3 $175,000 Auto repair garage: 4269 sf ground up lube facility, 1 story with basement.

12/5/2005 05030-10000-02215


Studio 3 Julio Cesar Grading: site prep for R/R for permit under PCIS: 05010-10000-02947. Minimum 90% recompaction.

9/29/2005 05048-40000-01468


TNT Electric Sign Inc.

$6000

Wall sign: install 3 new illuminated wall signs reading “jiffy lube” and 1 high logo sign.

06048-40000-00210


TNT Electric Sign Inc.

$20,000 Pole sign: install 2 new double face internally illuminated double face pylon pole signs and an electronic message unit to existing pole sign.



IV. EVALUATION

A. Historical resources identified

1. Historical Resources in the Project Vicinity

The records search for cultural resources within the project vicinity (approximately 0.25-mile

radius) involved review of ESA PCR's in-house files and SurveyLA data.34 Record search results

are summarized below. Located within a dense, urban setting with limited visibility, the 0.25-

mile radius records search was conducted to capture all known resources within the project

vicinity which may have views of the project site for the purpose of analyzing potential indirect

impacts. ESA PCR also consulted the National Register, California Register, Statewide

Historical Resources Inventory (“HRI”), California Points of Historical Interest (“PHI”),

California Historical Landmarks (“CHL”), SurveyLA, and City Monument database to identify

previously identified historical resources within the project vicinity.

One (1) property within the 0.25-mile radius has been identified by SurveyLA as a potential

historic district:

California State University, Northridge: SurveyLA identified the California State University,

Northridge campus as a potential district as an excellent example of postwar university

campus planning and development in Los Angeles. The survey also noted that the campus

could be significant as the site of a notable student-led protest associated with the African

American civil rights movement. In 1968, a group of African American students and their

supporters occupied the administration building (now Bayramian Hall) and locked in campus

administrators to protest the inferior treatment of minority students, discriminatory hiring

practices, and lack of culturally-relevant academic programs. SurveyLA assigned the

California State University, Northridge a status code of QQQ: Properties requiring additional

research to evaluate or that cannot be evaluated due to limited or no visibility.

2. Previous Evaluations of the Project Site

SurveyLA found the Building eligible for the National Register, California Register, and as an

HCM under Criteria A/1/1 and C/3/3 under the sub-theme of U.S. Postal Services and post Office

Construction, 1850-1980 (as described in the following section).35 According to the survey

results, the Building is an excellent example of a 1960s post office in Northridge, reflecting the

area’s expanding population and rising demand for government services after World War II. The

survey found the Building embodies features and building standards commonly applied to federal

postal facilities built in the Post-War era. The Registration Requirements and Eligibility

Standards developed by SurveyLA for this property type and which were used to evaluate the

34 SurveyLA, Historic Resources Survey Report, Northridge Community Plan Area, “Individual Resources” as of

7/9/15, (ARG). 35 Ibid, 52.


IV. Evaluation



subject property are reproduced below in Section B-1. ESA PCR’s evaluation of the subject

Building follows below in Section B-2.

B. Evaluation of Potential Historical Resources Within the Project Site

1. SurveyLA Registration Requirements and Eligibility Standards36

a. Federal Infrastructure and Services (1880-1980)

Sub-Theme

U.S. Postal Services and Post Office Construction (1880-1980)

Eligibility Standards

Originally constructed for use as a U.S. Post Office/Postal Facility

Character-Defining Features/Associative Features

For the National Register, a property must possess exceptional importance if less than 50

years of age

May be a good example of design features, facilities or equipment distinctive to its design

and use as a post office

May be a good example of public or monumental architecture

May be a good example or prototype of Federal design and construction standards and

policies

May be a good/excellent example of an architectural style from its period and/or the work

of a significant architect or builder

May be a rare example in a community

May contain, as an integral part of the building, a good example of a type, period or style

of artistic expression such as murals

May represent factors that influenced the settlement pattern of a community

May represent important periods in the history of Federal public works and public works

programs

36 Los Angeles Historic Context Statement Outline, Federal Infrastructure and Services, 1880-1980,

(http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/PP-GovtInfrastructure_0.pdf) and Los Angeles Historic Context Statement Outline, Post-War Modernism, 1946-1976, (http://www.preservation.lacity.org/files/Architecture_and_Engineering_1850-1980.pdf). p. 468.

http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/PP-GovtInfrastructure_0.pdf)%20and

http://www.preservation.lacity.org/files/Architecture_and_Engineering_1850-1980.pdf).%20p


IV. Evaluation



Retains most of the essential physical and character-defining features from the period of

significance

Integrity Considerations

Original landscaping may have been altered

Original signage may have been altered or removed

Original use may have changed

Should retain integrity of Location, Design, and Materials from the period of significance

b. Post-War Modernism (1946-1976)

Sub-Theme

Mid-Century Modernism – Institutional (1945-1970)

Eligibility Standards

Exhibits quality of design through distinctive features

Retains the essential character defining features of Mid-Century Modernism from the

period of significance

Was constructed during the period of significance

For the National Register, property must possess exceptional importance if less than 50

years of age

Character-Defining Features/Associative Features

Direct expression of the structural system, often wood or steel post and beam

Flat roof, at times with wide overhanging eaves

Floor-to-ceiling windows, often flush-mounted metal framed

Horizontal massing

If Expressionistic: sculptural forms intersecting with geometric volumes

If Expressionistic: curved, sweeping wall surfaces

If Expressionistic: dramatic roof forms, such as butterfly, A-frame, hyperbolic

paraboloid, folded plate or barrel vault

Simple, geometric volumes

Unornamented wall surfaces


IV. Evaluation



Integrity Considerations

Original garage doors may have been replaced

Original setting (surrounding buildings, landscape) may not be intact (this applies to

individual resources only; buildings associated with corporate or institutional campuses

must maintain integrity of setting)

Original use may have changed

Replacement of some windows and doors may be acceptable if the openings have not

been resized and original fenestration patterns have not been disrupted

The addition of decorative elements to originally sparse façades

The addition of security features such as screen doors and bars at windows

The painting of surfaces (wood) that might have originally been unpainted

2. Evaluation of 9543 Reseda Boulevard

a. Architectural Description

Figure 15. Front elevation, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view to the north. (ESA PCR 2016)


IV. Evaluation



ESA PCR conducted an intensive-level pedestrian survey of the subject property on March 29,

2016. The subject property is located at 9534 Reseda Boulevard in the Northridge neighborhood,

City of Los Angeles, California, on two parcels (APNs 2746-008-018 and 2746-008-003) totaling

approximately 67,057 square feet. APN 2746-008-003 consists of an open parking lot, while APN

2746-008-018 is improved with a single-story institutional structure used by the USPS as a postal

facility. Constructed in 1961, the Building is representative of a Mid-Century Modern style

institutional structure built specifically for the USPS by a private contractor under a lease-

purchase program. The Building has a rectangular plan with a symmetrical façade oriented west

fronting Reseda Boulevard, north of Plummer Street (Figure 15).

The Building is designed in two sections comprising a single-story, formal, public service zone at

the street that steps up to a large single-story high-bay industrial zone behind. The front section

occupies approximately one-quarter of the Building’s mass and is clad, at the west (street), north

and south elevations, with a utilitarian square-unit masonry block that defines the post office’s

public and pedestrian zone. The rear section occupies approximately three-quarters of the

building’s mass and is clad in a standard-dimension masonry block laid with narrow vertical but

wide horizontal mortar joints that delineates the large utilitarian industrial processing zone. The

grey unfinished concrete masonry block throughout appears to have been painted to its current

beige color at a later date. The Building terminates at the east (rear) façade with a concrete

loading dock covered with a steel decking roof. Unfinished reinforced concrete, plaster,

aluminum-framed doors and storefront windows, aluminum framed awning or hopper windows,

and steel doors make up the building’s other visible materials. Substantial customer parking

occupies the parcel at the north and an active lot for mail truck parking and loading occupies the

parcel at the east.

The front façade (west) is designed as a long blank wall interrupted at its center by a simple

screened entry composed of four square steel columns supporting a utilitarian metal screen brise-

soleil, or sun baffle, which the Los Angeles Times described as being originally made of redwood

(alteration)37, behind which lies a recessed landscaped entry courtyard which has undergone

accessibility and path-of-travel upgrades. Customers ascend from the sidewalk onto the courtyard

podium via several low stairs at the center of the opening, via a single large step to the right of the

opening, or via a handicapped ramp hugging the front wall of the building toward the north which

turns to enter to the left of the opening (all altered). Stair and handicapped ramp railings as well

as bicycle parking are all present at the front entry (alterations).

The entry courtyard is paved with concrete (altered) and incorporates two planting beds (altered),

a rectangular bed at the northeast corner and two square beds to the south. The inner walls of the

entry courtyard are each floor-to-ceiling four-bay aluminum-framed glass windows and door

units with plaster spandrels above. The north wall contains a single door that enters into the

rental post box and self-service area (possible alteration), the east wall contains a centered double

-door that enters into the main customer service area, and the south wall contains windows into

the postmaster’s private office. (Figures 16-18).

37 “Entry Court Screen Features of Branch.” Los Angeles Times, October 8, 1961


IV. Evaluation



Figure 16. Detail of recessed entry courtyard showing concrete paving (altered), aluminum framed windows,

plaster spandrels, and perforated screen (alteration) with decorative square-unit concrete block wall, 9534

Reseda Boulevard , view facing south, alterations indicated in red. (ESA PCR 2016)


IV. Evaluation



Figure 17. Detail of recessed entry courtyard with planters looking toward customer service and rental post box

entry, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view facing northeast, alterations indicated in red. (ESA PCR 2016)

Figure 18. Detail of recessed entry courtyard with planters looking toward rental mailbox entry, 9534 Reseda

Boulevard, view facing north, alterations including canopy, door, and planting bed are indicated in red. (ESA

PCR 2016)

The south elevation is blank but for a single-window toward the middle front of the Building, a

downspout toward the middle rear of the Building, and the change in wall texture and height

between the low customer service and the high-bay mail processing zones (Figure 19).


IV. Evaluation



Figure 19. Detail of south elevation showing square-unit masonry block at the front and two-part configuration

of building, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view facing east (ESA PCR 2016)

The north elevation reveals the same change in wall texture and height between the low customer

service zone at the front and the high-bay mail processing zone behind. On this side, the north

wall of the customer service zone is recessed several feet behind the wall of the mail processing

zone, accommodating a planting bed that protects the building from cars entering and exiting the

driveway, and a single aluminum frame window protected by a metal grille (alteration). The

postal processing zone also maintains its original aluminum frame windows, arrayed as a long

expanse along the upper half of the wall providing natural light for the interior work area. The

post office’s original flagpole remains at the northwest corner of the building (Figures 20 and 21).


IV. Evaluation



Figure 20. North elevation, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, facing southeast ( ESA PCR 2016)

Figure 21. Detail, north elevation, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view facing southwest (ESA PCR 2016)

The east (rear) elevation of the building accommodates a concrete six-space loading dock

sheltered by a cantilevered extension of the main roof and a lower steel panel roofed porch

supported on steel posts (alteration). The loading dock includes a single height truck-loading bay

at the north and five low truck-loading bays at the south. The east (rear) wall of the postal facility

includes several steel doors and a bank of aluminum frame windows protected with metal security

grilles (Figures 22-24).


IV. Evaluation



Figure 22. Rear elevation showing loading dock, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view facing west, alterations indicated

in red. (ESA PCR 2016)

Figure 23. The rear elevation looking up to metal decking roof (alteration), 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view facing

north (ESA PCR 2016)


IV. Evaluation



Figure 24. Shed Detail rear elevation showing access doors and security bars on windows at loading dock, 9534

Reseda Boulevard, view northwest (ESA PCR 2016)

The interior of the post office, like the exterior, consists of public service and mail processing

zones. The rental mailbox and self service area on the north as well as the central customer

service area have both been remodeled using the USPS standard fit-out systems (altered) that

entirely cover and completely obscure the original wall surface behind (Figure 25). The

postmaster’s office appears to be unchanged.

Figure 25. Interior, customer service area, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view southeast (ESA PCR 2016)


IV. Evaluation



The mail processing zone is an open warehouse under a long-span steel beam roof. This volume

accommodates updated contemporary mail processing machinery, individual desk and sorting

furniture, circulation for people and rolling equipment, as well as a lookout gallery at the upper

level of the rear wall. Various other offices and support rooms are located at the perimeter of this

space. Natural light is provided by the long expanse of windows along the upper half of the north

wall. New lighting, HVAC equipment, and mail sorting equipment occupy the space. (Figure 26).

Figure 26. Interior, mail processing area, 9534 Reseda Boulevard, view southwest, alterations indicated in red.

(ESA PCR 2016)

Integrity Analysis

The National and California Registers have specific language regarding integrity. Both require

that a resource retain sufficient integrity to convey its significance.38

In accordance with the

guidelines of the National Register, integrity is evaluated in regard to the retention of location,

design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The property must retain,

however, the essential physical features that enable it to convey its historic identity. Furthermore,

National Register Bulletin 15 states, “A property retains association if it is the place where the

event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer.

Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property’s

historic character. Because feeling and association depend on individual perceptions, their

retention alone is never sufficient to support eligibility of a property for the National Register.”39

The California Register requires that a resource retain enough of its historic character or

38

National Register Bulletin 15, p. 44. 39 Ibid, 15, p. 46.


IV. Evaluation



appearance to be recognizable as a historical resource and to convey the reasons for its

significance.

At the local level, the subject property is associated with two SurveyLA themes. Built for the

United States Postal Service in 1961, the Building is associated with the theme of U.S. Postal

Services and Post Office Construction in the post-war period. SurveyLA has determined that

integrity of location, design, and materials should be retained to convey an association with the

U.S. Postal Services and Post Office Construction theme. In addition to this theme, the subject

property appears to be designed in the Mid-Century Modern style of architecture popular at the

time. To be considered an excellent example of Mid-Century Modern institutional architecture,

SurveyLA suggests a potential resource retain its integrity of location, design, materials,

workmanship, feeling, and association.40

The integrity of 9534 Reseda Boulevard has been evaluated by ESA PCR below. These results

are based upon an intensive pedestrian survey conducted on March 29, 2016 and review of

documentary sources including building permits and assessor records. Alterations to the entrance

court including replacement of the original redwood screen with the existing metal screen, new

concrete paving and accessibility upgrades substantially compromise the integrity of the primary

façade.

Location:

The Building remains in its original location. Therefore, the Building retains integrity of

location.

Design:

Due to alterations of important primary features, the subject property retains only partial integrity

of design. Permits indicate two official changes to the Building since the 1961 construction: re-

roofing in 1992 and a 1995 ADA upgrade which appears to have added the concrete paving,

handrails and concrete ramp at the front of the Building. A Los Angeles Times report from

October of 1961 stated that the Building featured a redwood screen on the main elevation.

However, it appears that what was described as a redwood screen was subsequently changed to

the current metal screen (altered). Although the date at which this change was made is unclear,

the result is a substantial change to one of the most important character-defining features on the

primary elevation. Site observations indicate the building envelope may have been designed as a

deliberately unfinished surface that was later painted over (altered); the possible substitution of a

door for a window on the north fenestration bay inside the front entry court and modification of

the planting beds and entry paving are additional apparent alterations; and the introduction of an

additional service door between the main building and the rear loading dock also appears altered.

It also appears the paving in the central courtyard has been modified. These documented and

40 Los Angeles Historic Context Statement Outline, Federal Infrastructure and Services, 1880-1980,

(http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/PP-GovtInfrastructure_0.pdf) and Los Angeles Historic Context Statement Outline, Post-War Modernism, 1946-1976, (http://www.preservation.lacity.org/files/Architecture_and_Engineering_1850-1980.pdf). p. 468.

http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/PP-GovtInfrastructure_0.pdf)%20and

http://www.preservation.lacity.org/files/Architecture_and_Engineering_1850-1980.pdf).%20p


IV. Evaluation



apparent changes have partially compromised the original design intent of the Building.

Therefore, the Building retains only partial integrity of design.

Setting:

The subject property does not retain integrity of setting. There has been significant development

immediately adjacent to and in the surrounding area that has compromised the Mid-Century

character and scale of the immediate context including the auto repair facility that was built

directly to the south of the Post Office in 2005. Therefore, the Building no longer retains

integrity of setting.

Workmanship:

Physical inspection of the Property and permits on file with the LADBS indicate alterations to

two of the Building’s exterior elevations, on the front (altered entrance courtyard) and rear

elevations (altered loading dock); along with interior accessibility and path-of-travel upgrades,

renovations of the interior finishes and features in the entrance lobby, and upgrades to the mail

sorting workspace. The primary design feature on the front elevation, a redwood screen, was

replaced at an unknown date with the existing metal screen (altered), which is corroborated by the

fact that the courtyard paving is recent and was altered for the path-of-travel ADA improvements.

The subject property has partial integrity of workmanship.

Materials:

As with workmanship, the Building has retained partial integrity of its original materials dating

from its construction in 1961. While the masonry exterior on the Building’s primary (west)

elevation and secondary side elevations (north and south) remains intact, the original redwood

brise-soleil described by the Los Angeles Times41 has been replaced with a metal screen and the

entrance courtyard has been altered with new railings, concrete paving, steps and ramps. The

public entrance lobby has been substantially altered and updated, and the originally unfinished

concrete block exterior has been painted compromising the exterior finish, all of which have

cumulatively affected the Building’s integrity of materials. Therefore, the Building retains

partial integrity of materials.

Feeling:

The integrity aspect of feeling is a composite of design, workmanship and materials, all of which

taken together contribute to a property’s integrity of feeling. The subject property retains partial

integrity of feeling because of the alterations discussed above which detract from the property’s

integrity of design, workmanship and materials. While the property is still identifiable as a Mid-

Century post office, the alterations to the entrance courtyard and public lobby and the removal of

the redwood screen detract from its original design aesthetic, workmanship and materials, and the

building no longer coveys an authentic, crisp, Mid-century Modern design aesthetic and has

partially lost its sense of authenticity. Therefore, the Building retains partial integrity of

feeling.

41 “Entry Court Screen Features of Branch.” Los Angeles Times, October 8, 1961


IV. Evaluation



Association:

The subject property continues to be used as a post office and retains its integrity of association. It

also continues to convey its presence as a civic building related to Northridge’s Mid-Century

expansion and modernization. Therefore, the property retains its integrity of association.

Summary:

Based upon the historic contexts explored earlier in this report, the Building at 9534 Reseda

Boulevard appears associated with the USPS post office construction program in the Post-War

period and Mid-Century Modern style of architecture. However, the surrounding area has

experienced significant infill development over the years substantially altering the subject

property’s setting, and alterations to the Building’s primary elevation, interior, and rear loading

dock have eroded the Building’s integrity (Table 4). Upon physical inspection and review of

building permits on file with the City of Los Angeles, the Building appears to have few

alterations, however, those alterations are in key locations, are significant, and detract from its

integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling. The Building remains in its original

location and is still used as a postal facility, therefore retaining its integrity of association. In

sum, the Building retains partial integrity and at best only minimally meets the integrity threshold

for consideration as a potential historical resource.

TABLE 4 INTEGRITY MATRIX: 9534 RESEDA BOULEVARD

Lacks Integrity Retains Integrity

U.S. Postal Services and Post Office Construction

Location Yes

Design Partial

Materials Partial

Mid-Century Modernism – Institutional

Location Yes

Design Partial

Materials Partial

Workmanship Partial

Feeling Partial

Association Yes

Significance Evaluation

The Building at 9534 Reseda Boulevard was constructed in 1961 and is associated with the

historic context themes of Post-War Suburban Development (1945-1980); Post Office Facilities

after World War II (1945-1970); Maxwell Starkman (1956-2004); and Mid-Century Modernism

(1945-1970). SurveyLA identified the subject property as potentially significant, citing it as an

excellent example of a 1960s post office in Northridge that reflects its suburb’s expanding

population and rising demand for government services after World War II and as a building


IV. Evaluation



exhibiting the design features and building standards commonly applied to federal postal facilities

built in the Post-War era. Nevertheless, while suburban growth began in the Northridge area in

the early 1950s, the subject Building was constructed a decade later and does not appear to have

influenced the development patterns in the area. The Building was constructed to serve a growing

need of the expanding population, as were other government facilities in the area, including post

offices which are enumerated and described above in Table 1. A detailed evaluation of the

Building’s historic associations is provided below using the national, state, and local criteria.

Broad Patterns of History

With regard to broad patterns of history, the following are the relevant criteria:

National Register Criterion A: Is associated with events that have made a significant

contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

California Register Criterion 1: Is associated with events that have made a significant

contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage.

Los Angeles Historic Cultural Monument Criterion: The proposed site, building, or structure

reflects or exemplifies the broad cultural, political, economic, or social history of the

nation, state, or City (community).

Constructed in 1961, the Building is associated with the rise of suburbia that shaped Northridge

during the Post-War era. With growth throughout the South Bay, the San Fernando Valley42, and

the San Gabriel Valley, the City of Los Angeles grew more than any other city in the nation

between 1950 and 1960. From 1956 to 1961, Dun and Bradstreet noted that Northridge opened

the largest number of new businesses in the Valley.43 Northridge experienced the construction of

thousands of tract homes, construction of the new San Fernando Valley State College (1958),

now CSUN, and the commercial expansion of Reseda Boulevard as the area’s main street. With

the increasing population came a need for social and government services, which were met by the

rapid construction of civic and institutional facilities like the one on the subject property.

However, for a building to be considered a historic resource, its association must be significantly

involved with the broad patterns of history. Built in 1961, the Building was one of many Mid-

Century Modern style institutional facilities and post offices constructed in the San Fernando

Valley during the Post-War era. It replaced a post office designed to serve one route; within

months of opening, the new post office was already serving 22 routes demonstrating the tidal

wave of suburbanization already well underway in the community. Furthermore, the subject

Building is not and has never been owned by the postal service or any government agency. The

Building was constructed by a private developer as an income producing property. It was

constructed in the midst of the area’s suburbanizing phenomenon and, therefore, its construction

does not appear to have stimulated a development trend in the area nor is it representative of a

significant pattern of development. Furthermore, several government facilities were constructed

throughout the San Fernando Valley in a response to the growing need for services, including fire

42 “Los Angeles Tops ‘Big Ten’ in Growth,” Los Angeles Times, February 27, 1961. 43 “Northridge Tops Valley,” Los Angeles Times, May 26, 1961.


IV. Evaluation



and police stations, Department of Water and Power facilities, and new schools. The Building at

9534 Reseda Boulevard was not more important than any of these other facilities and therefore,

does not possess a significant association to warrant individual recognition as a historic resource.

Therefore, the Building does not appear individually eligible for the National Register

under criteria A, for the California Register under Criterion 1, or the local register.

Significant Persons

With regard to associations with important persons, the following are the relevant criteria:

National Register Criterion B: Is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.

California Register Criterion 2: Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.


is identified with historic personages or with important events in the main currents of

national, state, or local history.

The Building has always been used as a postal facility and does not appear to be identified with

historic personages or events in the main currents of national, state, or local history. Prior to the

Building’s construction in 1961, the property was occupied by a single-family residence. The

occupancy history of the former residence was not researched because the home is no long extant

on the subject property. Therefore, the Building is not eligible for listing under the National

Register Criterion B, California Register Criterion 2, or the local register for eligibility

related to a historic personage or event.

Architecture

With regard to architecture, design or construction, the following are the relevant criteria:

National Register Criterion C: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or

method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic

values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may

lack individual distinction.

California Register Criterion 3: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period,

region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative

individual, or possesses high artistic values.


embodies certain distinguishing architectural characteristics of an architectural‐type

specimen, inherently valuable for a study of a period style or method of construction; or the

proposed site, building, or structure is a notable work of a master builder, designer, or

architect whose individual genius influenced his age.

The Building is an example of a Mid-Century Modern style institutional facility constructed in

the Northridge neighborhood of Los Angeles in 1961. The Building exhibits the character-


IV. Evaluation



defining features associated with Mid-Century Modern style architecture, such as its simple

rectangular form, horizontal massing, flat roof, and flush mounted metal framed windows,.

However, it does not appear to be an exceptional, distinctive, outstanding, or singular example of

its type or style. Furthermore, alterations to the entrance court including replacement of the

original redwood screen with the existing metal screen, new concrete paving and accessibility

upgrades substantially compromise the integrity of the primary façade. The Building was one of

the USPS’s Thousands Series buildings, based upon predetermined design guidelines outlined in

the Building Designs Manual with functionality and low-cost construction in mind and therefore,

is a simple expression of Mid-Century style, which was popular at the time of its construction.

The Building is just one of many post office facilities constructed in the San Fernando Valley

region of Los Angeles based upon a formulaic design template. While the Building may exhibit

the design principles employed by the USPS in the Post-War years, it does not do so in a way that

stands out above the other existing postal facilities found throughout the City of Los Angeles.

Postal facilities like the one located at 14416 Chase St in Panorama City or the one at 10919

Sepulveda Blvd in San Fernando also demonstrate the USPS’s Post-War design guidelines.

The Building’s architect, Maxwell Starkman appears to have been a prolific designer credited

with the construction of thousands of single-family tract homes, commercial, institutional, and

industrial buildings. His firm, Starkman and Associates was well known for mass production low-

cost architecture. The firm’s work can be found throughout the San Fernando Valley, and

includes the post offices built for the City of Lancaster in 1961 and for La Puente in 1962 that

both use a similar palette of materials. Starkman’s contribution to architecture was mass

production, which would be better exemplified by one of the many tract developments for which

he was responsible. Furthermore, the firm’s most notable works are the Sony Pictures Plaza in

Culver City and the Simon Wiesenthal Center Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles. Both

buildings are better examples of Starkman’s capabilities as an architect than the subject property

at 9534 Reseda Boulevard.

Therefore, the Building does not meet National Register Criterion C, California Register

Criterion 3, or the local register for eligibility related to a distinctive type, method, or

period of construction, or as a notable work of a master.

Archaeology

National Register Criterion D. It yields, or may be likely to yield, information important in

prehistory or history.

California Register Criterion 4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important

in prehistory or history.

The Building’s location was previously improved with a single-family residence. Due to the

excessive development of the Project site, it is not likely to yield any information important to

prehistory or history. Therefore, the Building does not meet the above criterion at the

national or state level.


IV. Evaluation



C. Conclusion

Although the Building is associated with historic themes like Post-War Suburban Development

(1945-1980); Post Office Facilities after World War II (1945-1970); Maxwell Starkman (1956-

2004); and Mid-Century Modernism (1945-1970), it does not appear to possess significant

associations within those themes as an individual resource. Built in 1960, the Building was one of

many institutional facilities constructed in the San Fernando Valley during the postwar era. It was

constructed a decade after the area experienced a major period of suburbanization and therefore,

its construction does not appear to have influenced a development trend in the area nor is it

representative of a significant pattern of development. The Building is not a representative

example of its type or method of construction. The San Fernando Valley has other post offices

built in the same period as part of the USPS lease-to-purchase “Thousands Series” program that

use the same material palette and design aesthetic and are also better examples of their type. The

subject Building is not and has never been owned by the postal service or any government

agency. The Building was constructed by a private developer as an income producing property.

The Building does not appear to be associated with any significant personages. It is one of many

Mid-Century Modern style institutional facilities constructed in Northridge and throughout the

San Fernando Valley. No aspect of the Building’s design appears revolutionary or influential to

the Mid-Century style of architecture. Furthermore, the Building’s architect, Maxwell Starkman

was known for his cost-effective approach to building design. He utilized cheap materials with

simple functional designs that could be constructed quickly. Starkman and his firm were

responsible for the design and construction of thousands of single-family residences as well as

commercial, institutional, and government buildings. The Building does not best represent

Starkman’s creative capabilities as an architect, but rather shows Starkman’s adherence to USPS

design guidelines; and therefore it is not a notable work of a master. It follows USPS design

guidelines and is neither a creative nor distinctive work of architecture. Therefore, the Building

is ineligible for individual listing under any federal, state and local eligibility criterion. ESA

PCR recommends the subject property should be assigned a CHR status code of 6z, “found

ineligible for the National Register, California Register, and local designation through survey

evaluation.”

ESA PCR determined that the Building on the Project Site does not qualify as a historic resource.

Furthermore, no historic resources were identified within a quarter mile radius, other than the

California State University, Northridge campus, which was identified as a potential resource in

SurveyLA. However, SurveyLA gave the university a status code of QQQ, requiring further

evaluation. Furthermore, the campus would have no view of the Project Site. Because no historic

resources were found on the Project Site or surrounding area, ESA PCR determined that the

Project would not cause any direct or indirect impacts to historic resources.



V. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ancestry.com

California Code of Regulations, California Register of Historical Resources (Title 14,

Chapter11.5), Section 4852(c).

California Public Resources Code § 5024.1.

City of Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 36 § 60.2.

County of Los Angeles, Tax Assessor.

Los Angeles Public Library, California Index.

Los Angeles Times.

Los Angeles Herald.

National Park Service. National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register

Criteria for Evaluation. Washington DC: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service,

Interagency Resources Division, 1990, rev. 1991.

National Park Service. National Register Bulletin 16: Guidelines for Completing National

Register Forms. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, 1986.

Office of Historic Preservation. Instructions for Recording Historical Resources. March 1995.

Office of State Historic Preservation. California Historic Resources Inventory, Survey Workbook

(excerpts). Sacramento, CA: State of California, 1986.

Parker, Patricia L. National Register Bulletin 24, Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for

Preservation Planning. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1985.

Roderick, Kevin. The San Fernando Valley: America’s Suburb. Los Angeles: Los Angeles Times Books, 2002.

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps

SurveyLA. Historic Resources Survey Report: Northridge Community Plan Area. Prepared for

City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning, Office of Historic Resources by

Architectural Resources Group, Inc. (July 2015).

USPS Nationwide Historic Context Study: Postal Facilities Constructed or Occupied Between

1940 and 1971. Prepared for the U.S. Postal Service by URS Group Inc. September 2012.

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Professional Qualifications

Appendix B – Index and Parcel Maps

Appendix C – Tract Number 2334 Map (1917)

Appendix D – Tract Number 24409 Map (1960)

Appendix E – Previous Evaluation (SurveyLA, 2015)

Appendix F – DPR Forms (2016)

Appendix A Professional Qualifications

Margarita Jerabek, Ph.D. Director of Historic Resources

Margarita Jerabek has 25 years of professional practice in the United States with an extensive background in historic preservation, architectural history, art history and decorative arts, and historical archaeology. She specializes in Visual Art and Culture, 19th-20th Century American Architecture, Modern and Contemporary Architecture, Architectural Theory and Criticism, Urbanism, and Cultural Landscape, and is a regional expert on Southern California architecture. Her qualifications and experience meet and exceed the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in History, Archaeology, and Architectural History. Margarita has managed and conducted a wide range of technical studies in support of environmental compliance projects, developed preservation and conservation plans, and implemented preservation treatment projects for public and private clients in California and throughout the United States.

Relevant Experience Margarita has prepared a broad range of environmental documentation and conducted preservation projects throughout the Los Angeles metropolitan area and Southern California. She provides expert assistance to public agencies and private clients in environmental review, from due diligence through planning/design review and permitting and when necessary, implements mitigation and preservation treatment measures on behalf of her clients. As primary investigator and author of hundreds of technical reports, plan review documents, preservation and conservation plans, HABS/HAER/HALS reports, construction monitoring reports, salvage reports and relocation plans, she is a highly experienced practitioner and expert in addressing historical resources issues while supporting and balancing project goals.

She is an expert in the evaluation, management and treatment of historic properties for compliance with Sections 106 and 110 of the NHPA, NEPA, Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act, CEQA, and local ordinances and planning requirements. Margarita regularly performs assessments to ensure conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, and assists clients with adaptive reuse/rehabilitation projects by providing preservation design and treatment consultation, agency coordination, legally defensible documentation, construction monitoring and conservation treatment.

Margarita is a regional expert on Southern California architecture. She has prepared a broad range of environmental documentation and conducted preservation projects throughout the Los Angeles metropolitan area as well as in Ventura, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego counties. Beyond her technical skill, she is a highly experienced project manager with broad national experience throughout the United States. She currently manages PCR’s on-call preservation services with the City of Santa Monica, County of San Bernardino Department of Public Works, City of Hermosa Beach, Los Angeles Unified School District, and Long Beach Unified School District.

EDUCATION

Ph.D., Art History, University of California, Los Angeles

M.A., Architectural History, School of Architecture, University of Virginia

Certificate of Historic Preservation, School of Architecture, University of Virginia

B.A., Art History, Oberlin College

25 YEARS EXPERIENCE

AWARDS

2014 Preservation Award, The Dunbar Hotel, L.A. Conservancy

2014 Westside Prize, The Dunbar Hotel, Westside Urban Forum

2014Design Award: Tongva Park & Ken Genser Square, Westside Urban Forum

2012 California Preservation Foundation Award, RMS Queen Mary Conservation Management Plan, California Preservation Foundation

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS

California Preservation Foundation

Santa Monica Conservancy

Los Angeles Conservancy

Society of Architectural Historians

National Trust for Historic Preservation Leadership Forum

American Institute of Architects (AIA), National Allied Member

Amanda Kainer Senior Architectural Historian

Amanda Kainer has nine years of professional and academic experience in the practice of historic preservation and architectural history. She has conducted extensive archival research, field observation, recordation, and prepared survey documentation and assisted in database management for numerous PCR historic resources projects. She has training and substantial experience in the evaluation and conservation of art and architecture and passion for interior design.

Relevant Experience Amanda has completed and co-authored a wide range of architectural investigations including historic resources assessment and impacts analysis reports for compliance with CEQA, character-defining features reports, plan reviews, investment tax credit applications, Section 106 significance evaluations, and HABS documentations. She has also performed extensive research, survey work, and prepared numerous landmark and preliminary assessment reports as a part of PCR’s On-Call Historic Preservation Contract with the City of Santa Monica.

She is involved a diverse set of projects and analyses. These include anything from a California Register nomination for the UCLA Faculty Center to a paint analysis for a Churrigueresque style 1920s commercial building in Santa Monica. Amanda has co-authored Section 106 reports for the residential development in Thousand Oaks, Santa Monica Pier, Avalon Fuel Dock on Catalina Island, and a Mid-Century roadside motel in Bakersfield. For LAUSD, she authored a character-defining features analysis for seven historic schools, provided historic analysis for an MND, and preliminary resource evaluations and plan reviews for various historic schools.

Historic Resources Assessments. Amanda has contributed to the research, site inspections, and report preparation of a number of historic resources assessments in the Los Angeles metropolitan area for compliance with CEQA. She has evaluated a number of different types of potential historical resources, including single-family and multi-family residences, banks, commercial buildings, schools, hotels, and cultural landscapes in Beverly Hills, Venice, Los Angeles, and Santa Monica.

Large Scale Survey Experience. She was a contributing author for three major Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles– Adelante Eastside, Wilshire Center/Koreatown, and Normandie 5 Redevelopment Areas. Amanda also served as ESA PCR Survey Team Leader and co-author for the comprehensive survey of over 4,000 objects of fine and decorative arts aboard the RMS Queen Mary in Long Beach. Additionally, she helped complete the district-wide survey and evaluation of the Long Beach Unified School District and a windshield survey of Hermosa Beach for the Historic Resources Chapter of the Hermosa Beach General Plan Update.

EDUCATION

M.S., Historic Preservation (Emphasis: Conservation Science), Columbia University

B.S., Design (Emphasis: Interior Architecture), University of California, Davis

B.A., Art History, University of California, Davis

9 YEARS EXPERIENCE

AWARDS

Joel Polsky Academic Achievement Award, American Society of Interior Designers, 2008

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS

California Preservation Foundation

Los Angeles Conservancy

Santa Monica Conservancy (Volunteer Docent for the Shotgun House)

Docomomo SoCal

Association of Preservation Technology Western Chapter

Christian Taylor Assistant Architectural Historian

Christian Taylor is a historic resources specialist with academic and professional experience in assessing historic structures and contributing to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)-level documents. Chris has continued to hone his skills in management of rehabilitation and restoration projects, preparation of documentation of historic contexts, and the use of non-invasive material investigation methods.

Relevant Experience Working for the California Department of Parks & Recreation (DPR), restoration contractors, and environmental consultants, he has become versed in the research, writing, and assessment of historic resources from the public and private perspective.

Serving first as a History Intern and then Interpretive Specialist for the DPR, Chris served as the lead representative for the Crystal Cove State Historic Park during the second phase of the cottage restoration project program. His primary role was to liaise with contractors ensure the project met both the Parks Department and Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. Also with the DPR,

Chris worked alongside resident historians to organize the contributing documentation and assist with the historic landscape report documenting La Purisima Mission’s structures and their significance in relation to the original restoration work done in the 1930s.

He also familiarized himself with historic restoration field through the preparation of thousands of pages of documentation associated with the Wilshire Temple and Atascadero City Hall projects.

While with ESA PCR, Chris has performed architectural history research, survey and assessment work for the Hermosa Beach General Plan Update, the Capitol Mills project in Los Angeles, and assisted with historic resources assessments for a commercial property and an education center in West Hollywood, as well as multiple residential properties in Venice and Los Angeles.

EDUCATION

Master’s Degree, Historic Preservation, University of Southern California

B.A., History, University of Oklahoma

3 YEARS EXPERIENCE

Stephanie Hodal Architectural Historian Intern

Stephanie Hodal is an experienced professional with expertise in communications for the architectural and engineering sector. She will apply her corporate communication and marketing expertise and academic experience in historic preservation/conservation to support the Historic Resources Division.

Stephanie provides research and writing support regarding permit and assessor information, construction and owner chronologies, architectural descriptions, and historic context. Thus far, she has provided a brief history of golf course design for the Verdugo Hills Golf Course, the history of San Fernando Valley development as context for an early house in Studio City; and LGBT history as context for an office/retail/restaurant complex in West Hollywood. She has also prepared an architectural description for a multi-building mid-century apartment complex in Hollywood and comprehensive research on the land development, corporate, and design history regarding a factory complex in Whittier.

Relevant Coursework History of the American City History of American Architecture and Urbanism Cross Cultural Issues in Landscape Design Topics in Modern Architecture in Southern California Global History of Architecture to 1500 Introduction to Historic Site Documentation Fundamentals of Historic Preservation Historic Preservation Management, Planning and Development Historic Preservation Philosophy Conservation Methods and Materials Historic Materials and Construction Sustainable Conservation of the Built Environment Smart Growth Planning Urban Villages Design Skills for Urban Planners Introduction to City Planning Communicating City Design

EDUCATION

Candidate, Master of Heritage Conservation, University of Southern California School of Architecture, 2016

Certificate of Historic Preservation, Boston Architectural College, 2009

A.B., American Studies, Smith College, Northhampton, Massachusetts, 1980

1 YEAR EXPERIENCE

Appendix B Index and Parcel Maps

Appendix C Tract Number 2334 Map (1917)

Appendix D Tract Number 24409 Map (1960)

Appendix E Previous Evaluation (SurveyLA, 2015)

Northridge Report

Individual Resources – 07/13/15

Page 16 of 19

Status code: 5S3

Reason: Significant as a long-term location of a business important to the commercial identity of Northridge.

Joyce's Coffee Shop has been in continuous operation at this location since 1955. The property

appears to meet local criteria only and may not meet significance thresholds for National Register or

California Register eligibility.

Primary Address: 9534 N RESEDA BLVD

Other Address: 9530 N RESEDA BLVD

Name: United States Post Office, Northridge Branch

Year built: 1961

Architectural style: Modern, Mid-Century

Context 1:

Context: Public and Private Institutional Development, 1850-1980

Sub context: Government Infrastructure and Services, 1850-1980

Theme: Federal Infrastructure and Services, 1850-1980

Sub theme: U.S. Postal Services and Post Office Construction, 1850-1980

Property type: Post Office/Postal Facility

Property sub type: No Sub-Type

Criteria: A/1/1&C/3/3

Status code: 3S;3CS;5S3

Reason: Excellent example of a 1960s post office in Northridge; reflects the area’s expanding population and

rising demand for government services after World War II. Embodies design features and building

standards commonly applied to federal postal facilities built in the postwar era.

Appendix F DPR Forms (2016)

State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #

PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code 6Z Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 5 *Resource Name or #: 9534 Reseda Boulevard P1. Other Identifier: United States Post Office, Northridge Branch

*P2. Location: Not for Publication Unrestricted *a. County: Los Angeles and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.)

*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Date: T ; R ; ¼ of ¼ of Sec ; M.D. B.M. c. Address: 9534 Reseda Boulevard City: Los Angeles Zip: 91324 d. UTM: Zone: 10 ; mE/ mN (G.P.S.) e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) Elevation: Oriented with the primary (west) elevation facing west toward Reseda Boulevard. Located on the east side of Reseda Boulevard. Tract 24409, Lot 1, Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 2764-008-018 and 2746-008-003

*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) The subject property is located at 9534 Reseda Boulevard in the Northridge neighborhood, City of Los Angeles, California, on two parcels (APNs 2746-008-018 and 2746-008-003) totaling approximately 67,057 square feet. APN 2746-008-003 consists of an open parking lot, while APN 2746-008-018 is improved with a single-story institutional structure (Building) used by the United States Post Service (USPS) as a postal facility. Constructed in 1961, the Building is representative of a Mid-Century Modern style institutional structure built specifically for the USPS by a private contractor under a lease-purchase program. The Building has a rectangular plan with a symmetrical façade oriented west fronting Reseda Boulevard, north of Plummer Street. The Building is designed in two sections comprising a single-story, formal, public service zone at the street that steps up to a large single-story high-bay industrial zone behind. The front section occupies approximately one-quarter of the Building’s mass and is clad, at the west (street), north and south elevations, with a utilitarian square-unit masonry block that defines the post office’s public and pedestrian zone. The rear section occupies approximately three-quarters of the building’s mass and is clad in a standard-dimension masonry block laid with narrow vertical but wide horizontal mortar joints that delineates the large utilitarian industrial processing zone. The grey unfinished concrete masonry block throughout appears to have been painted to its current beige color at a later date. (See Continuation Sheet)

*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP6. 1-3 story commercial building *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View, date, accession #) Primary Elvation, view east, 3/29/2016

*P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: Historic Prehistoric Both 1961 (LA County Assessor)

*P7. Owner and Address: Symphony Development 10866 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 225 Los Angeles, California 90024

*P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation, and address) ESA PCR Services, 201 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 500, Santa Monica, CA 90401 *P9. Date Recorded: 8/ 3/ 2016 *P10. Survey Type: Historic Resources Assessment *P11. Report Citation: ESA PCR. Historic Resources Assessment. Prepared for Symphony Development. August 2016.

*Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (List):

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information

State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 2 of 5 *NRHP Status Code 6Z *Resource Name or # 9534 Reseda Boulevard B1. Historic Name: United States Post Office, Northridge Branch B2. Common Name: United States Post Office, Northridge Branch B3. Original Use: Post Office B4. Present Use: Post Office

*B5. Architectural Style: Mid-Century Modern *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) The Valley’s rapid growth created the need for more post office capacity. Northridge’s previously existing post office (1952) located at 8661 Reseda, at the boulevard’s intersection with Parthenia Street, had reached its maximum processing volume and was “breaking at the seams at its present location.” In May of 1960, the Postmaster General approved construction of a new facility planned to be 12,000 square feet at a cost of $120,000. The new facility was to be located approximately one mile north at 9524 Reseda Boulevard. On July 1, 1960, construction bids were due for the new building. To prepare the site, permits show that an existing family dwelling, garage, and playhouse built in the early 1950s were removed and relocated to a different address. Building permits for the post office project were issued on February 3, 1961 to Wagner Construction Company, listed as the owner and contractor. The permit also listed architect Maxwell Starkman (Maxwell Starkman & Associates) and engineer Paul Greenfield. The permits valued the project at $97,000 with an added $500 for a flagpole. Groundbreaking for the new facility was celebrated by a ceremony on February 2, 1961. Only two permits were issued for modifications to the subject property after 1961: in 1992 the post office was re-roofed and, in 1995, it appears that it was brought into alignment with ADA regulations with changes to handrails, bathrooms, the path of travel, and restriping in the parking lot to identify handicapped parking areas.

*B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location: Yes *B8. Related Features: None. B9a. Architect: Maxwell Starkman b. Builder: Wagner Construction

*B10. Significance: Theme: Post-War Suburban Development (1945-1980); Post Office Facilities after World War II (1945-1970); Architect Maxwell Starkman (1956-2004); and Mid-Century Modernism (1945-1970). Area: Northridge

Period of Significance: 1961 Property Type: Post Office (Institutional) Applicable Criteria: None (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)

The Building at 9534 Reseda Boulevard was constructed in 1961 and is associated with the historic context themes of Post-War Suburban Development (1945-1980); Post Office Facilities after World War II (1945-1970); Maxwell Starkman (1956-2004); and Mid-Century Modernism (1945-1970). SurveyLA identified the subject property as potentially significant, citing it as an excellent example of a 1960s post office in Northridge that reflects its suburb’s expanding population and rising demand for government services after World War II and as a building exhibiting the design features and building standards commonly applied to federal postal facilities built in the postwar era. Nevertheless, while suburban growth began in the Northridge area in the early 1950s, the subject Building was constructed a decade later and does not appear to have influenced the development patterns in the area. The Building was constructed to serve a growing need of the expanding population, as were other government facilities in the area, including post offices. Therefore, the Building is ineligible for individual listing under any federal, state and local eligibility criteria and is assigned a NRHP status code of 6Z. A detailed evaluation of the Building’s historic associations is provided on the continuration sheets using the national, state, and local criteria. B11. Additional Resource Attributes:

*B12. References: See continuation sheets B13. Remarks: *B14. Evaluator: ESA PCR, 201 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 500,

Santa Monica, CA 90401

*Date of Evaluation: 8/ 3/ 2016

(This space reserved for official comments.)

DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information

State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 3 of 5 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 9534 Reseda Boulevard P3a. Description (cont): The Building terminates at the east (rear) façade with a concrete loading dock covered with a steel decking roof. Unfinished reinforced concrete, plaster, aluminum-framed doors and storefront windows, aluminum framed awning or hopper windows, and steel doors make up the building’s other visible materials. Substantial customer parking occupies the parcel at the north and an active lot for mail truck parking and loading occupies the parcel at the east. The front façade (west) is designed as a long blank wall interrupted at its center by a simple screened entry composed of four square steel columns supporting a utilitarian metal screen brise-soleil, or sun baffle, which was originally made of redwood (alteration), behind which lies a recessed landscaped entry courtyard which has undergone accessibility and path-of-travel upgrades. Customers ascend from the sidewalk onto the courtyard podium via several low stairs at the center of the opening, via a single large step to the right of the opening, or via a handicapped ramp hugging the front wall of the building toward the north which turns to enter to the left of the opening (all altered). Stair and handicapped ramp railings as well as bicycle parking are all present at the front entry (alterations). The entry courtyard is paved with concrete (altered) and incorporates two planting beds (altered), a rectangular bed at the northeast corner and two square beds to the south. The inner walls of the entry courtyard are each floor-to-ceiling four-bay aluminum-framed glass windows and door units with plaster spandrels above. The north wall contains a single door that enters into the rental post box and self-service area (possible alteration), the east wall contains a centered double -door that enters into the main customer service area and the south wall contains windows into the postmaster’s private office.

B10. Significance (cont): The Building at 9534 Reseda Boulevard was constructed in 1961 and is associated with the historic context themes of Post-War Suburban Development (1945-1980); Post Office Facilities after World War II (1945-1970); Maxwell Starkman (1956-2004); and Mid-Century Modernism (1945-1970). SurveyLA identified the subject property as potentially significant, citing it as an excellent example of a 1960s post office in Northridge that reflects its suburb’s expanding population and rising demand for government services after World War II and as a building exhibiting the design features and building standards commonly applied to federal postal facilities built in the postwar era. Nevertheless, while suburban growth began in the Northridge area in the early 1950s, the subject Building was constructed a decade later and does not appear to have influenced the development patterns in the area. The Building was constructed to serve a growing need of the expanding population, as were other government facilities in the area, including other post offices. A detailed evaluation of the Building’s historic associations is provided below using the national, state, and local criterion.

Broad Patterns of History With regard to broad patterns of history, the following are the relevant criteria:

National Register Criterion A: Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

California Register Criterion 1: Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage.

Los Angeles Historic Cultural Monument Criterion: The proposed site, building, or structure reflects or exemplifies the broad cultural, political, economic, or social history of the nation, state, or City (community).

Constructed in 1961, the Building is associated with the rise of suburbia that shaped Northridge during the Post-War era. With growth throughout the South Bay, the San Fernando Valley, and the San Gabriel Valley, the City of Los Angeles grew more than any other city in the nation between 1950 and 1960. From 1956 – 1961, Dun and Bradstreet noted that Northridge opened the largest number of new businesses in the Valley.1 Northridge experienced the construction of thousands of tract homes, construction of the new San Fernando Valley State College (1958), now California State University Northridge, and the commercial expansion of Reseda Boulevard as the area’s main street. With the increasing population came a need for social and government services, which were met by the rapid construction of civic and institutional facilities like the one on the subject property. However, for a building to be considered a historic resource, its association must be significantly involved with the broad patterns of history. Built in 1961, the Building was one of many Mid-Century Modern style institutional facilities and post offices constructed in the San Fernando Valley during the Post-War era. It replaced a post office designed to serve one route; within months of opening, the new post office was already serving 22 routes demonstrating the tidal wave of suburbanization

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)

State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 4 of 5 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 9534 Reseda Boulevard already well underway in the community. It was constructed in the midst of the area’s suburbanizing phenomenon and, therefore, its construction does not appear to have stimulated a development trend in the area nor is it representative of a significant pattern of development. Furthermore, several government facilities were constructed throughout the San Fernando Valley in a response to the growing need for services, including fire and police stations, Department of Water and Power facilities, and new schools. The Post Office Building at 9534 Reseda Boulevard was not more important than any of these other facilities and therefore, does not possess a significant association to warrant individual recognition as a historic resource.

Therefore, the Building does not appear individually eligible for the National Register under criteria A, for the California Register under Criterion 1, or the local register.

Significant Persons With regard to associations with important persons, the following are the relevant criteria:

National Register Criterion B: Is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.

California Register Criterion 2: Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.

Los Angeles Historic Cultural Monument Criterion: The proposed site, building, or structure is identified with historic personages or with important events in the main currents of national, state, or local history.

The Building has always been used as a postal facility and does not appear to be identified with historic personages or events in the main currents of national, state, or local history. Prior to the Building’s construction in 1961, the property was occupied by a single-family residence. The occupancy history of the former residence was not researched because the home is no long extant on the subject property.

Therefore, the Building is not eligible for listing under the National Register Criterion B, California Register Criterion 2, or the local register for eligibility related to a historic personage or event.

Architecture With regard to architecture, design or construction, the following are the relevant criteria:

National Register Criterion C: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction.

California Register Criterion 3: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.

Los Angeles Historic Cultural Monument Criterion: The proposed site, building, or structure embodies certain distinguishing architectural characteristics of an architectural‐type specimen, inherently valuable for a study of a period style or method of construction; or the proposed site, building, or structure is a notable work of a master builder, designer, or architect whose individual genius influenced his age.

The Building is an example of a Mid-Century Modern style institutional facility constructed in the Northridge neighborhood of Los Angeles in 1961. The Building exhibits the character-defining features associated with Mid-Century Modern style architecture, such as its simple rectangular form, horizontal massing, flat roof, and flush mounted metal framed windows,. However, it does not appear to be an exceptional, distinctive, outstanding, or singular example of its type or style.

The Building was one of the USPS’s Thousands Series buildings, based upon predetermined design guidelines outlined in the Building Designs Manual with functionality and low-cost construction in mind and therefore, is a simple expression of Mid-Century style, which was popular at the time of its construction. The Building is just one of many post office facilities constructed in the San Fernando Valley region of Los Angeles. While the Building may exhibit the design principles employed by the USPS in the post-war years, it does not do so in a way that stands out above the other existing postal

1 “Northridge Tops Valley,” Los Angeles Times, May 26, 1961. DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)

State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 5 of 5 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 9534 Reseda Boulevard facilities found throughout the City of Los Angeles. Postal facilities like the one located at 14416 Chase St in Panorama City or the one at 10919 Sepulveda Blvd in San Fernando also demonstrate the USPS’s post-war design guidelines.

The Building’s architect, Maxwell Starkman appears to have been a prolific designer credited with the construction of thousands of single-family tract homes, commercial, institutional, and industrial buildings. His firm, Starkman and Associates was well known for mass production low-cost architecture. The firm’s work can be found throughout the San Fernando Valley, and includes the post offices built for the City of Lancaster in 1961 and for La Puente in 1962 that both use a similar palette of materials. Starkman’s contribution to architecture was mass production, which would be better exemplified by one of the many tract developments for which he was responsible. Furthermore, the firm’s most notable works are the Sony Pictures Plaza in Culver City and the Simon Wiesenthal Center Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles. Both buildings are better examples of Starkman’s capabilities as an architect than the Subject Property at 9534 Reseda Boulevard.

Therefore, the Building does not meet National Register Criterion C, California Register Criterion 3, or the local register for eligibility related to a distinctive type, method, or period of construction, or as a notable work of a master.

Archaeology National Register Criterion D. It yields, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

California Register Criterion 4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

The Building’s location was previously improved with a single-family residence. Due to the excessive development of the Project site, it is not likely to yield any information important to prehistory or history. Therefore, the Building does not meet the above criterion at the national or state level.

B12. References (cont): Ancestry.com California Code of Regulations, California Register of Historical Resources (Title 14, Chapter11.5), Section 4852(c). California Public Resources Code § 5024.1. City of Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 36 § 60.2. County of Los Angeles, Tax Assessor. Los Angeles Public Library, California Index. Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Herald. McAlester, Virginia and Lee McAlester. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1990. National Park Service. National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Washington DC: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, Interagency Resources Division, 1990, rev. 1991. National Park Service. National Register Bulletin 16: Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, 1986. Office of Historic Preservation. Instructions for Recording Historical Resources. March 1995. Office of State Historic Preservation. California Historic Resources Inventory, Survey Workbook (excerpts). Sacramento, CA: State of California, 1986. Parker, Patricia L. National Register Bulletin 24, Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1985. Roderick, Kevin. The San Fernando Valley: America’s Suburb. Los Angeles: Los Angeles Times Books, 2002. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps SurveyLA. Historic Resources Survey Report: Northridge Community Plan Area, prepared for City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning, Office of Historic Resources by Architectural Resources Group, Inc. (July 2015). USPS Nationwide Historic Context Study: Postal Facilities Constructed or Occupied Between 1940 and 1971. Prepared for the U.S. Postal Service by URS Group Inc. September 2012.

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)

AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS 9534 & 9546 Reseda Boulevard Mixed-Use Project

City of Los Angeles Project # 17-741-101

Prepared for: Symphony Northridge, LLC

11828 La Grange Avenue, Suite 150 Los Angeles, CA 90025

Prepared by: ENVICOM CORPORATION

4165 E. Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Suite 290 Westlake Village, CA 91362

April 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A I R Q U A L I T Y I M P A C T A N A L Y S I S 9 5 3 4 & 9 5 4 6 R E S E D A B O U L E V A R D M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T

i

SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 ATMOSPHERIC SETTING 1 3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1 4.0 AIR QUALITY SETTING 4 5.0 AIR QUALITY IMPACT 8 6.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS (GHG) IMPACT 12 Tables Table 1 Ambient Air Quality Standards 4 Table 2 Health Effects of Major Criteria Pollutants 6 Table 3 Project Area Air Quality Monitoring Summary 2011-2015 7 Table 4 Daily Emissions Thresholds 8 Table 5 Conceptual Construction Equipment Fleet 10 Table 6 Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 10 Table 7 Local Significance Thresholds (LST) and Peak Daily Onsite Emissions 11 Table 8 Maximum Daily Operational Emissions 12 Figures Figure 1 Vicinity Map 2 Figure 2 Site Plan 3 Appendix Appendix A CalEEMod2016.3.1 Computer Model Output (Gross Daily Trip Generation) Appendix B CalEEMod2016.3.1 Computer Model Output (Zero Net Change Trip Generation)


1

1.0 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Air Quality Impact Analysis is to identify, describe, and evaluate the significance of potential air quality impacts resulting from the construction and operation of a proposed mixed-use development in the City of Los Angeles. This analysis also includes a discussion and evaluation of potential greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 2.0 ATMOSPHERIC SETTING The project site is located in the Northridge Community Plan Area of the City of Los Angeles, within the South Coast Air Basin (air basin). The air basin is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west, the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east, and San Diego County to the south. In addition to being a metropolitan area with a high level of human activity, the topography and climate of Southern California combine to produce unhealthful air quality in the air basin. Low temperature inversions, light winds, shallow vertical mixing, and extensive sunlight, in combination with topographical features such as adjacent mountain ranges that hinder dispersion of air pollutants, can result in degraded air quality within the basin. 3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed project would develop an infill site located at 9534 and 9546 Reseda Boulevard (Figure 1, Vicinity Map). The project would include removal of an existing 12,000 square foot post office facility and surface parking lot, and would construct a 4-story mixed-use structure with a total of 128 dwelling units and 5,725 square feet of commercial/retail/restaurant space. The structure would include two subterranean parking levels providing a total of 240 parking spaces to serve the project (200 spaces for residents, and 40 spaces for commercial uses). Common area amenities within the project would include a community room, courtyard, and swimming pool (Figure 2, Site Plan). The proposed project would occupy an approximately 1.54-acre site. The site is bordered by existing commercial uses to the south, multi-family residences to the north and east, and commercial and multi-family residential uses to the west. The California State University at Northridge (CSUN) campus lies within a walking distance of approximately 0.2 miles from the project frontage with Reseda Boulevard. Several Metro bus stops are located in the project vicinity, including stops within approximately 200 to 400 feet of the project site along Reseda Boulevard. Construction of the project would require demolition of the existing post office facility and parking lot, and construction of the proposed building. Grading of the site would require excavation and export of approximately 25,000 cubic yards of soil for development of the proposed subterranean parking.

FIGUR

E1Vicinity Map FEET

6003000

Aerial Source: GoogleEarth Pro, Oct. 2, 2016.

9534 & 9546 RESEDA BOULEVARD MIXED-USE PROJECT

Plummer St.

Citronia St.

Vincennes St.

Praire St.

Dearborn St.

Superior St.

Lassen St.

Kinzie St.

Etiw

anda

Ave

.

Rese

da B

lvd.

Yola

nda

Ave.

California StateUniversity Northridge

Halsted St.

Lind

ley

Ave.

ProjectSite

Darb

y Av

e.

LegendProject AreaCalifornia StateUniversity NorthridgeBus Stop

FIGUR

E1Site Plan FEET

4522.50

9534 & 9546 RESEDA BOULEVARD MIXED-USE PROJECT

Source: Symphony Development and Steinberg Architects, Mar. 18, 2016


4

4.0 AIR QUALITY SETTING Ambient Air Quality Standards National and State ambient air quality standards (AAQS), shown in Table 1, are air quality levels considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare of "sensitive receptors," which include people susceptible to respiratory distress such as asthmatics, the elderly, young children, people weakened by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise.

Table 1


5

Table 1 Table 1 (Continued)


6

Healthy adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed. Recent research has shown, however, that chronic exposure to ozone (the primary ingredient in photochemical smog) may lead to adverse respiratory health even at concentrations close to the ambient standard. Sources and health effects of various pollutants are shown in Table 2.

Table 2

Health Effects of Major Criteria Pollutants Pollutants Examples of Sources Health Effects

Particulate Matter (PM-2.5, PM-10)

• Cars and trucks (especially diesels)

• Fireplaces, woodstoves • Windblown dust from roadways,

agriculture and construction

• Hospitalizations for worsened heart diseases

• Emergency room visits for asthma • Premature death

Ozone (O3)

• Precursor sources*: motor vehicles, industrial emissions, and consumer products

• Cough, chest tightness • Difficulty taking a deep breath • Worsened asthma symptoms • Lung inflammation

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

• Any source that burns fuel such as cars, trucks, construction and farming equipment, and residential heaters and stoves

• Chest pain in heart patients ** • Headaches, nausea ** • Reduced mental alertness ** • Death at very high levels **

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

• See carbon monoxide sources • Increased response to allergens

Source: California Air Resources Board, ARB Fact Sheet: Air Pollution and Health, webpage (reviewed December 2, 2009), accessed at https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/health/fs/fs1/fs1.htm March 1, 2017. * Ozone is not generated directly by these sources. Rather chemicals emitted by these precursor sources react with

sunlight to form ozone in the atmosphere. ** Health effects from CO exposures occur at levels considerably higher than ambient.

Baseline Air Quality In the air basin, the agencies designated to develop the regional Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) are the SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) was adopted in 2013, and an updated AQMP for 2016 is in the planning stages as AQMPs are required to be updated every three years. Primary pollutants are those pollutants that are emitted in their already unhealthful form, the effects of which can generally be more closely linked to the specific location where they are emitted. Many particulates, especially fugitive dust emissions, are also primary pollutants. Because of the non-attainment status of the air basin for PM-10, an aggressive dust control program is required for construction projects to control fugitive dust. Secondary pollutants require time to transform from a more benign form to a more unhealthful contaminant, and their impact is more regional and may be far from the source. Existing levels of ambient air quality and historical trends and projections in the project area are best documented from measurements made by the SCAQMD. The geographically closest SCAQMD air quality monitoring station to the project is in downtown Los Angeles, providing monitoring data for


7

regional air pollutants such as ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and 10-micron diameter or less particulate matter (PM-10 and PM-2.5). Table 3 provides the last five years of data from this monitoring station. Ozone, the primary ingredient in photochemical smog, is an important pollution problem in the Los Angeles basin. As shown in Table 3, air samples at the downtown Los Angeles SCAQMD station have exceeded the federal 8-hour standard on three days in the last five years. Similarly, five days in the last five years have exceeded the California one-hour standard. The state 8-hour standard has been exceeded a total of fifteen times in the last five years. The West San Fernando Valley SCAQMD station does not report PM-10 data, however, the East San Fernando Valley station reports that approximately two percent of all days monitored in that location experienced a violation of the State PM-10 standard in 20141. The East San Fernando Valley station reported that the federal PM-10 standard was not exceeded in the past five years for which data is provided, while West San Fernando Valley station reported the current federal 24-hour AAQS for PM-2.5 was exceeded less than one percent of all monitored days in 2015. Primary pollutants such as CO and NOX are low near the project site because there is substantial excess dispersive capacity to accommodate localized emissions of those pollutants. As shown in Table 3, allowable levels of these criteria pollutants have not been exceeded in the past five years.

Table 3 Project Area Air Quality Monitoring Summary 2011-2015

(Number of Days Standards Exceeded and Maximum Observed Concentration)

Pollutant/Standard 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Ozone 1-Hour > 0.09 ppm (S) 17 18 7 6 11 8-Hour > 0.07 ppm (S) 35 38 21 31 34 8- Hour > 0.075 ppm (F) 26 23 11 2 4 Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.130 0.129 0.124 0.116 0.119 Max. 8-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.103 0.098 0.092 0.092 0.094 Carbon Monoxide 8-Hour > 9. ppm (S, F) 0 0 0 0 0 Max 8-Hour Conc. (ppm) 2.8 2.8 2.3 3.0 3.0 Nitrogen Dioxide 1-Hour > 0.18 ppm (S) 0 0 0 0 0 Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.056 0.071 0.058 0.059 0.073 Inhalable Particulates (PM-10) 24-Hour > 50 µg/m3 (S) 2/55 1/60 1/58 2/164 No data 24-Hour > 150 µg/m3 (F) 0/55 0/60 0/58 0/164 No data Max. 24-Hr. Conc. (µg/m3) 61 55 52 68 No data Ultra-Fine Particulates (PM-2.5) 24-Hour > 35 µg/m3 (F) 1/117 2/110 1/118 0/109 1/113 Max. 24-Hr. Conc. (µg/m3) 39.8 41.6 41.8 27.2 36.8 Source: SCAQMD Monitoring Reports from the West San Fernando Station (East San Fernando Valley Station for PM-10) S=State Standard F=Federal Standard

1 The East San Fernando Valley SCAQMD monitoring station did not report PM-10 data for 2015.


8

5.0 AIR QUALITY IMPACT Significance Criteria Air quality impacts are considered significant if they cause clean air standards to be violated where they are currently met, or if they substantially contribute to an existing violation of standards. Any substantial emissions of air contaminants for which there is no safe exposure, or nuisance emissions such as dust or odors, would also be considered a significant impact. Based on Appendix G of the California CEQA Guidelines, a project would have a potentially significant impact if it:

a. Conflicts with or obstructs implementation of the applicable air quality plan. b. Violates any air quality standard or contributes substantially to an existing or projected air quality

violation. c. Results in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutants for which the project

region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors).

d. Exposes sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. e. Creates objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

Air Quality Planning While conformity with adopted plans, forecasts and programs relative to population, housing, employment and land use designations could indicate conformance with the current AQMP, the air quality impact significance for this proposed project has been analyzed on a project-specific basis to determine consistency with SCAQMD project impact evaluation thresholds. For determining project significance under CEQA, the SCAQMD has designated emissions level thresholds for evaluating regional air quality impact significance. Projects in the SCAQMD with daily emissions that exceed emission thresholds shown in Table 4 could result in significant impacts.

Table 4 Daily Emissions Thresholds

Pollutant Construction Operations ROG 75 55 NOX 100 55 CO 550 550 PM-10 150 150 PM-2.5 55 55 SOX 150 150

Source: SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, November 1993 Rev. Additional Indicators

In its CEQA Handbook, the SCAQMD also states that additional indicators should be used as screening criteria to determine the need for further analysis with respect to air quality. The additional indicators are as follows:

• Project could interfere with the attainment of the federal or state ambient air quality standards by either violating or contributing to an existing or projected air quality violation.


9

• Project could result in population increases within the regional statistical area which would be in excess of that projected in the AQMP and in other than planned locations for the project’s build-out year.

• Project could generate vehicle trips that cause a CO hot spot. For the proposed project, diesel exhaust toxic air contaminants (TAC’s) emitted from construction equipment would occur over a relatively brief period while construction is occurring. Health effects of TAC’s are evaluated based on an accumulation over an assumed 70-year lifespan. Any measurable diesel TAC exposure from the project would occur for only the brief portion of this project’s lifetime during construction, estimated to be less than two years. The SCAQMD’s resolution activity for odor compliance is mandated under California Health & Safety Code Section 41700, and falls under SCAQMD Rule 402. This rule on Public Nuisance Regulation states: “A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.” Sensitive Receptors Air quality impacts are analyzed relative to those persons with the greatest sensitivity to air pollution exposure. Such persons are called “sensitive receptors.” Sensitive population groups include young children, the elderly and the acutely and chronically ill (e.g., those with cardio-respiratory disease, including asthma). For this project, nearby residences are considered to be sensitive uses because they may be occupied for extended periods, and residents may be outdoors when exposure is highest. Construction Activity Impacts Dust is typically the primary concern during construction projects where land clearing and grading are proposed. Because such emissions are not amenable to collection and discharge through a controlled source, they are called "fugitive emissions.” Emission rates vary as a function of many parameters (soil silt, soil moisture, wind speed, area disturbed, number of vehicles, depth of disturbance or excavation, etc.). CalEEMod was developed by the SCAQMD to provide a model by which to calculate both construction emissions and operational emissions from a variety of land use projects. It calculates both the daily maximum and annual average emissions for criteria pollutants as well as total or annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Estimated construction emissions were modeled using CalEEMod 2016.3.1 to identify maximum daily emissions for each pollutant during project construction. The output reports from CalEEMod are included as Appendix A to this report. Construction emissions were modeled based on the construction equipment fleet list and approximate duration of each construction phase shown in Table 5. Utilizing this indicated equipment fleet, for the proposed project, the project’s maximum daily construction emissions as calculated by CalEEMod are listed in Table 6. All construction grading projects in the City of Los Angeles must comply with the requirements of SCAQMD Rule 403, Fugitive Dust, which requires the implementation of Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) for all fugitive dust sources. SCAQMD Rule 403, Control Measure 08-2 states that


10

during earth moving activities, projects are required to “Re-apply water as necessary to maintain soils in a damp condition and to ensure that visible emissions do not exceed 100 feet in any direction”. Therefore, pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 403, the project would be required implement adequate watering of exposed surfaces during grading. As seen in Table 6, peak daily construction activity emissions of criteria air pollutants are estimated to be far below SCAQMD thresholds.

Table 5 Conceptual Construction Equipment Fleet

Phase Name and Duration Equipment

Demolition (20 days) 1 Concrete/Industrial Saw 1 Rubber-tired Dozer 3 Loader/Backhoes

Grading (40 days) 1 Grader 1 rubber tired dozer 1 Loader/Backhoe

Construction (200 days)

1 Crane 1 Forklift 1 Generator set 1 Loader/Backhoe 3 Welders

Paving (10 days)

1 cement/mortar mixer 1 Paver 1 Paving equipment 1 Roller 1 Loader/Backhoe

Architectural Coating (20 days) 1 Air Compressor

Table 6

Maximum Daily Construction Emissions (pounds/day) ROG NOX CO SO2 PM-10 PM-2.5

Maximum Daily Construction Emissions a 43.5 45.5 23.7 0.08 4.55 2.46

SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55 Significant Impact? Y/N No No No No No No Source: CalEEMod output, April 5, 2017 a Assumes no credit for Tier 1 or higher emission reduction technology that could be associated with a newer construction fleet if employed for this project.

Localized Significance Thresholds Analysis The SCAQMD has developed analysis parameters to evaluate ambient air quality on a local level in addition to the more regional emissions-based thresholds of significance. These analysis elements are called Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs). LSTs were developed in response to Governing Board’s Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative 1-4 and the LST methodology was provisionally adopted in October 2003 and formally approved by SCAQMD’s Mobile Source Committee in February 2005.


11

Use of an LST analysis for a project is optional. For the proposed project, the primary source of possible LST impact would be during construction. LSTs are applicable for a sensitive receptor where it is possible that an individual could remain for 24 hours such as a residence, hospital or convalescent facility. LSTs are only applicable to the following criteria pollutants: NOX, CO, PM-10, and PM-2.5. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, and are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each source receptor area and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. LST screening tables provide thresholds for 25, 50, 100, 200 and 500-meter source-receptor distances. Due to existing residences located within 25 meters of the project boundary, the 25-meter thresholds were considered for this project. LST pollutant screening level concentration data is currently published for 1, 2 and 5-acre sites. For this project, thresholds for a 1-acre site was used. This evaluation is based on estimated onsite daily construction emissions for the phase and year representing the highest daily emissions. Daily averages would be lower than the reported maximum amounts. Table 7 shows the relevant thresholds and the estimated peak daily onsite emissions during the construction phases that would generate the highest level of onsite emissions for each pollutant evaluated for LST impacts.2 All construction projects in the City of Los Angeles must comply with the requirements of SCAQMD Rule 403, Fugitive Dust, which requires the implementation of Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) for all fugitive dust sources, and the AQMP, which identifies Best Available Control Measures (BACM) and Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) for area sources and point sources, respectively. SCAQMD Rule 403, Control Measure 08-2 states that during earth moving activities, projects are required to “Re-apply water as necessary to maintain soils in a damp condition and to ensure that visible emissions do not exceed 100 feet in any direction”. Therefore, pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 403, the project would be required to implement adequate watering of exposed surfaces during grading. As seen in Table 7, the peak onsite emissions during construction would not exceed the applicable SCAQMD LSTs, and as such, potential LST impacts would be less than significant.

Table 7

Local Significance Thresholds (LST) and Peak Daily Onsite Emissions (pounds/day)

LST 1.0 acre/25 meters NOX CO PM-10 PM-2.5 Central LA LST Threshold 103 426 4 3 Peak Onsite Daily Emissions 18 7 2.96 1.93 Significant Impact? Y/N No No No No Source: CalEEMod output, April 5, 2017

Asbestos and Lead Based Paint Dependent on the date of construction of the existing building, it is possible that demolition workers may encounter asbestos containing materials (ACM) and/or lead based paint (LBP). SCAQMD Rule 1403 provides regulatory guidelines for ACM abatement, and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations for LBP handling and disposal must be adhered to during demolition if such materials are identified. 2 Offsite construction emissions, such as export hauling, are not evaluated for local significance at receptors adjacent to the site.


12

Operational Impacts During operations, the proposed land uses would result in air quality emissions of criteria pollutants from area sources, energy sources, and mobile sources. The SCAQMD thresholds for air quality impacts from operations are shown above in Table 4. As an infill development, the proposed project’s operational emissions would be at least somewhat offset by the removal of the existing land use on the site. Based on the project’s traffic assessment,3 the project’s net trip generation would be 850 trips less than the number of vehicles accessing the site under current conditions with the existing post office facility. Therefore, the project’s net change in operational emissions from mobile sources would be less than current conditions with the existing land use that occupies the site. For a conservative evaluation, CalEEMod was used to estimate emissions without taking credit for the net reduction in daily trips.4 Operations of the proposed development would not be anticipated to exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds for criteria pollutants as shown in Table 8. As seen in Table 8, the project’s operational emissions would be far below SCAQMD thresholds even without credit for a net reduction in daily trip generation and mobile source emissions; therefore, operational impacts would be less than significant.

Table 8 Maximum Daily Operations Emissions (pounds/day)

Daily Emissions ROG NOX CO SO2 PM-10 PM-2.5 Area 3.18 0.12 10.64 0.00 0.06 0.06 Energy 0.05 0.42 0.18 0.00 0.03 0.03 Mobile a 2.42 11.01 31.89 0.09 7.32 2.03 Total 5.65 11.55 42.71 0.09 7.41 2.12 SCAQMD Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 Significant Impact? Y/N No No No No No No Source: CalEEMod output, March 9, 2017. a Gross emissions. Net change in mobile emissions would be less as daily trips would be reduced.

6.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS (GHG) IMPACT Greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) emitted by human activity are implicated in global climate change. These GHGs contribute to an increase in the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere by preventing long wavelength heat radiation in some parts of the infrared spectrum from leaving the atmosphere. For purposes of planning and regulation, Section 15364.5 of the California Code of Regulations defines GHGs to include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride. Fossil fuel combustion in the transportation sector (on-road motor vehicles, off-highway mobile sources, and aircraft) is the single largest source of GHG emissions, accounting for approximately half of GHG emissions globally. Industrial and commercial sources are the second largest contributors of GHG emissions with about one-fourth of total emissions. Residential uses in California contribute 7 percent to the GHG statewide burden plus a proportionate share of in-and out-of-state electrical generation emissions (ARM, 2014). AB 32 is one of the most significant pieces of environmental legislation regarding greenhouse gas emissions that California has adopted. Major components of the AB 32 include:

• Require the monitoring and reporting of GHG emissions beginning with sources or categories of sources that contribute the most to statewide emissions.

3 DKS Associates, 9534 9546 Reseda Boulevard Mixed Used Development, Traffic Assessment, April 19, 2016. 4 No modeling was conducted to evaluate the projected reduction in vehicle trips of 850 daily trips less than existing uses.


13

• Requires immediate “early action” control programs on the most readily controlled GHG sources. • Mandates that by 2020, California’s GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels. • Must complement efforts to achieve and maintain federal and state ambient air quality standards

and to reduce toxic air contaminants. GHG sources are categorized into direct sources (i.e. company owned) and indirect sources (i.e. not company owned). Direct sources include combustion emissions from on-and off-road mobile sources, and fugitive emissions. Indirect sources include off-site electricity generation and non-company owned mobile sources. Thresholds of Significance Based on the CEQA Appendix G guidelines, a project would have a potentially significant GHG impact if it:

• Generates GHG emissions, directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, or,

• Conflicts with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted to reduce GHG emissions.

Section 15064.4 of the Code specifies how significance of GHG emissions is to be evaluated. The process is broken down into quantification of project-related GHG emissions, making a determination of significance, and specification of any appropriate mitigation if impacts are found to be potentially significant. At each of these steps, the new GHG guidelines afford the lead agency with substantial flexibility. Emissions identification may be quantitative, qualitative or based on performance standards. This analysis relies on the quantified GHG emissions estimated for this project using CalEEMod. To determine a significance threshold for GHG emissions, in September 2010 the SCAQMD CEQA Significance Thresholds GHG Working Group recommended a threshold of 3,500 Metric Tons (MT) Carbon Dioxide equivalent (CO2e) for residential use projects. This 3,500 MT/year recommendation has been used as a guideline for this analysis. Construction Activity GHG Emissions During project construction, the CalEEMod computer model estimates that the construction activities would generate a total of 601.6 MT CO2e emissions. SCAQMD GHG emissions evaluation guidance is to amortize construction emissions over a 30-year lifetime, which results in a project amortized annual emissions of approximately 20.05 MT CO2e emissions. Project Operational GHG Emissions The project proposes a diverse land use mix with onsite residential, recreational amenities, and retail/restaurant uses. The project site is also located near public transit bus stops, existing retail and commercial uses, and is within walking distance of the CSUN campus. As an infill development, the proposed project’s operational emissions would be at least somewhat offset by the removal of the existing land use on the site. Based on the project’s traffic assessment,5 the project’s net trip generation would be 850 trips less than the number of vehicles accessing the site under current conditions with the existing post office facility. For a conservative evaluation, CalEEMod was used to estimate emissions without taking credit for the net reduction in daily trips, and also with vehicle trips input set to zero, assuming no net change in vehicle 5 DKS Associates, 9534 9546 Reseda Boulevard Mixed Used Development, Traffic Assessment, April 19, 2016.


14

trips. No modeling was conducted to evaluate the projected reduction in vehicle trips of 850 daily trips less than existing uses. Based on the CalEEMod output files found in the appendix of this report, the project’s annual operational GHG emissions including the estimated gross mobile emissions, would be 2,458.3 MT CO2e. The CalEEMod output files also show that assuming a net zero change in daily trips, which takes credit for some portion of the projected reduction in daily trips, the project’s GHG emissions from a combination of area sources, energy use, water use, and waste disposal would be 949.1 MT CO2e. With the addition of the amortized construction GHG emissions discussed above, and no net change in daily trips, the project would result in annual emissions of approximately 969.2 MT CO2e, which is well below the 3,500 MT/year threshold guideline. As the project’s traffic report states that the project’s net change in trip generation at the project site would be 850 less trips, the project’s operational GHG emissions levels would be even less than reported in this analysis, which was based on a net zero change in mobile emissions. The project’s proposed diverse land use mix, and nearby commercial uses and public transit bus stops would further reduce vehicle use and therefore further reduce GHG emissions.

Appendix A CalEEMod2016.3.1

Computer Model Output (Gross Daily Trip Generation)

1.1 Land Usage

Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population

Apartments Mid Rise 128.00 Dwelling Unit 1.54 124,854.00 366

Strip Mall 5.73 1000sqft 0.00 5,725.00 0

Enclosed Parking with Elevator 240.00 Space 0.00 96,000.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics

Urbanization

Climate Zone

Urban

12

Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics

Utility Company Los Angeles Department of Water & Power

2019Operational Year

CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)

1227.89 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr)

0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr)

9534 & 9546 Reseda Blvd. Mixed-Use ProjectLos Angeles-South Coast County, Summer

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 4/5/2017 12:08 PMPage 1 of 29

9534 & 9546 Reseda Blvd. Mixed-Use Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer

Project Characteristics - Land Use - 1.54 total lot area, 124,854 sf res. area.Grading - Demolition - Woodstoves - no hearths.Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Construction Phase - Site is fully developed and paved. No separate site prep phase.Off-road Equipment - No Site Prep PhaseOff-road Equipment -

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value

tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 40 0

tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 20.00



tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/14/2018 5/17/2018





tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/1/2018 4/20/2018



tblFireplaces FireplaceDayYear 25.00 0.00

tblFireplaces FireplaceHourDay 3.00 0.00

tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00

tblFireplaces NumberGas 108.80 0.00



2.0 Emissions Summary

tblFireplaces NumberNoFireplace 12.80 0.00

tblFireplaces NumberWood 6.40 0.00

tblGrading AcresOfGrading 15.00 1.50


tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 25,000.00

tblLandUse BuildingSpaceSquareFeet 128,000.00 124,854.00

tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 128,000.00 124,854.00

tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.37 1.54



tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00



tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2018 2019

tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 0.00 8.00

tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 6.40 0.00

tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 6.40 0.00

tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00

tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00



2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10

Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

Year lb/day lb/day

2017 3.9599 45.4864 23.7188 0.0791 6.0823 1.6541 7.1003 2.8958 1.5465 3.8376 0.0000 8,445.2026

8,445.2026

0.9289 0.0000 8,468.4242

2018 43.4985 21.6635 22.1189 0.0469 1.6899 1.0973 2.7871 0.4525 1.0587 1.5112 0.0000 4,555.8215

4,555.8215

0.5275 0.0000 4,569.0085

Maximum 43.4985 45.4864 23.7188 0.0791 6.0823 1.6541 7.1003 2.8958 1.5465 3.8376 0.0000 8,445.2026

8,445.2026

0.9289 0.0000 8,468.4242

Unmitigated Construction


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Year lb/day lb/day

2017 3.9599 45.4864 23.7188 0.0791 3.5374 1.6541 4.5554 1.5220 1.5465 2.4639 0.0000 8,445.2026

8,445.2026

0.9289 0.0000 8,468.4242

2018 43.4985 21.6635 22.1189 0.0469 1.6899 1.0973 2.7871 0.4525 1.0587 1.5112 0.0000 4,555.8215

4,555.8215

0.5275 0.0000 4,569.0085

Maximum 43.4985 45.4864 23.7188 0.0791 3.5374 1.6541 4.5554 1.5220 1.5465 2.4639 0.0000 8,445.2026

8,445.2026

0.9289 0.0000 8,468.4242

Mitigated Construction


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total

Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e

Percent Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.74 0.00 25.74 41.03 0.00 25.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00



2.2 Overall Operational


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Category lb/day lb/day

Area 3.1826 0.1232 10.6378 5.6000e-004

0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0000 19.0685 19.0685 0.0188 0.0000 19.5387

Energy 0.0497 0.4246 0.1817 2.7100e-003

0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 541.8222 541.8222 0.0104 9.9300e-003

545.0420

Mobile 2.4175 11.0082 31.8867 0.0963 7.2123 0.1085 7.3208 1.9305 0.1020 2.0325 9,773.0414

9,773.0414

0.5638 9,787.1365

Total 5.6498 11.5559 42.7063 0.0996 7.2123 0.2010 7.4134 1.9305 0.1945 2.1250 0.0000 10,333.9321

10,333.9321

0.5930 9.9300e-003

10,351.7172

Unmitigated Operational


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Area 3.1826 0.1232 10.6378 5.6000e-004

0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0000 19.0685 19.0685 0.0188 0.0000 19.5387

Energy 0.0497 0.4246 0.1817 2.7100e-003

0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 541.8222 541.8222 0.0104 9.9300e-003

545.0420

Mobile 2.4175 11.0082 31.8867 0.0963 7.2123 0.1085 7.3208 1.9305 0.1020 2.0325 9,773.0414

9,773.0414

0.5638 9,787.1365

Total 5.6498 11.5559 42.7063 0.0996 7.2123 0.2010 7.4134 1.9305 0.1945 2.1250 0.0000 10,333.9321

10,333.9321

0.5930 9.9300e-003

10,351.7172

Mitigated Operational



3.0 Construction Detail

Construction Phase

Phase Number

Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week

Num Days Phase Description

1 Demolition Demolition 4/5/2017 5/2/2017 5 20

2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 5/3/2017 5/2/2017 5 0

3 Grading Grading 5/5/2017 6/29/2017 5 40

4 Building Construction Building Construction 6/30/2017 4/5/2018 5 200

5 Paving Paving 4/6/2018 4/19/2018 5 10

6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 4/20/2018 5/17/2018 5 20

OffRoad Equipment


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Percent Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Residential Indoor: 252,829; Residential Outdoor: 84,276; Non-Residential Indoor: 8,588; Non-Residential Outdoor: 2,863; Striped Parking Area: 5,760 (Architectural Coating – sqft)

Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 1

Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 1.5

Acres of Paving: 0



Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor

Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48

Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 6.00 9 0.56

Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73

Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74

Building Construction Cranes 1 6.00 231 0.29

Building Construction Forklifts 1 6.00 89 0.20

Site Preparation Graders 0 8.00 187 0.41

Paving Pavers 1 6.00 130 0.42

Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38

Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40

Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 6.00 247 0.40

Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97 0.37

Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37

Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37

Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37

Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37

Grading Graders 1 6.00 187 0.41

Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 132 0.36

Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 0 7.00 247 0.40

Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45

Trips and VMT



3.2 Demolition - 2017


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Fugitive Dust 0.5906 0.0000 0.5906 0.0894 0.0000 0.0894 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 2.7625 26.7594 15.5573 0.0241 1.6477 1.6477 1.5404 1.5404 2,421.4229

2,421.4229

0.6125 2,436.7347

Total 2.7625 26.7594 15.5573 0.0241 0.5906 1.6477 2.2383 0.0894 1.5404 1.6298 2,421.4229

2,421.4229

0.6125 2,436.7347

Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

Water Exposed AreaClean Paved Roads

Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count

Worker Trip Number

Vendor Trip Number

Hauling Trip Number

Worker Trip Length

Vendor Trip Length

Hauling Trip Length

Worker Vehicle Class

Vendor Vehicle Class

Hauling Vehicle Class

Architectural Coating 1 27.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT

Building Construction 7 134.00 30.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT

Demolition 5 13.00 0.00 55.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT

Grading 3 8.00 0.00 3,125.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT

Paving 5 13.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT

Site Preparation 0 8.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT





Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0310 0.9559 0.1952 2.2500e-003

0.0481 5.0500e-003

0.0531 0.0132 4.8300e-003

0.0180 242.7812 242.7812 0.0170 243.2053

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.0813 0.0624 0.8003 1.6900e-003

0.1453 1.3500e-003

0.1467 0.0385 1.2500e-003

0.0398 167.5593 167.5593 6.9600e-003

167.7332

Total 0.1123 1.0183 0.9955 3.9400e-003

0.1934 6.4000e-003

0.1998 0.0517 6.0800e-003

0.0578 410.3405 410.3405 0.0239 410.9384

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Fugitive Dust 0.2658 0.0000 0.2658 0.0402 0.0000 0.0402 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 2.7625 26.7594 15.5573 0.0241 1.6477 1.6477 1.5404 1.5404 0.0000 2,421.4229

2,421.4229

0.6125 2,436.7347

Total 2.7625 26.7594 15.5573 0.0241 0.2658 1.6477 1.9134 0.0402 1.5404 1.5806 0.0000 2,421.4229

2,421.4229

0.6125 2,436.7347

Mitigated Construction On-Site





Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0310 0.9559 0.1952 2.2500e-003

0.0481 5.0500e-003

0.0531 0.0132 4.8300e-003

0.0180 242.7812 242.7812 0.0170 243.2053

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.0813 0.0624 0.8003 1.6900e-003

0.1453 1.3500e-003

0.1467 0.0385 1.2500e-003

0.0398 167.5593 167.5593 6.9600e-003

167.7332

Total 0.1123 1.0183 0.9955 3.9400e-003

0.1934 6.4000e-003

0.1998 0.0517 6.0800e-003

0.0578 410.3405 410.3405 0.0239 410.9384

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Site Preparation - 2017


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000


3.4 Grading - 2017


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Fugitive Dust 4.6270 0.0000 4.6270 2.4977 0.0000 2.4977 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 1.6023 18.2915 7.0342 0.0141 0.8738 0.8738 0.8039 0.8039 1,444.8958

1,444.8958

0.4427 1,455.9636

Total 1.6023 18.2915 7.0342 0.0141 4.6270 0.8738 5.5008 2.4977 0.8039 3.3015 1,444.8958

1,444.8958

0.4427 1,455.9636




3.4 Grading - 2017


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.8819 27.1565 5.5461 0.0640 1.3658 0.1434 1.5093 0.3744 0.1372 0.5116 6,897.1934

6,897.1934

0.4819 6,909.2402

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.0500 0.0384 0.4925 1.0400e-003

0.0894 8.3000e-004

0.0903 0.0237 7.7000e-004

0.0245 103.1134 103.1134 4.2800e-003

103.2204

Total 0.9320 27.1948 6.0386 0.0650 1.4552 0.1443 1.5995 0.3981 0.1380 0.5361 7,000.3068

7,000.3068

0.4862 7,012.4606



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Fugitive Dust 2.0822 0.0000 2.0822 1.1240 0.0000 1.1240 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 1.6023 18.2915 7.0342 0.0141 0.8738 0.8738 0.8039 0.8039 0.0000 1,444.8958

1,444.8958

0.4427 1,455.9636

Total 1.6023 18.2915 7.0342 0.0141 2.0822 0.8738 2.9559 1.1240 0.8039 1.9278 0.0000 1,444.8958

1,444.8958

0.4427 1,455.9636




3.4 Grading - 2017


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.8819 27.1565 5.5461 0.0640 1.3658 0.1434 1.5093 0.3744 0.1372 0.5116 6,897.1934

6,897.1934

0.4819 6,909.2402

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.0500 0.0384 0.4925 1.0400e-003

0.0894 8.3000e-004

0.0903 0.0237 7.7000e-004

0.0245 103.1134 103.1134 4.2800e-003

103.2204

Total 0.9320 27.1948 6.0386 0.0650 1.4552 0.1443 1.5995 0.3981 0.1380 0.5361 7,000.3068

7,000.3068

0.4862 7,012.4606


3.5 Building Construction - 2017


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Off-Road 2.9653 19.2365 14.3568 0.0220 1.2313 1.2313 1.1875 1.1875 2,043.8641

2,043.8641

0.4298 2,054.6085

Total 2.9653 19.2365 14.3568 0.0220 1.2313 1.2313 1.1875 1.1875 2,043.8641

2,043.8641

0.4298 2,054.6085






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.1566 3.9115 1.1129 7.9700e-003

0.1921 0.0328 0.2248 0.0553 0.0313 0.0866 847.7788 847.7788 0.0586 849.2443

Worker 0.8380 0.6427 8.2491 0.0174 1.4978 0.0139 1.5117 0.3972 0.0129 0.4101 1,727.1495

1,727.1495

0.0717 1,728.9421

Total 0.9946 4.5543 9.3621 0.0254 1.6899 0.0467 1.7366 0.4525 0.0442 0.4967 2,574.9283

2,574.9283

0.1303 2,578.1864



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Off-Road 2.9653 19.2365 14.3568 0.0220 1.2313 1.2313 1.1875 1.1875 0.0000 2,043.8641

2,043.8641

0.4298 2,054.6085

Total 2.9653 19.2365 14.3568 0.0220 1.2313 1.2313 1.1875 1.1875 0.0000 2,043.8641

2,043.8641

0.4298 2,054.6085






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.1566 3.9115 1.1129 7.9700e-003

0.1921 0.0328 0.2248 0.0553 0.0313 0.0866 847.7788 847.7788 0.0586 849.2443

Worker 0.8380 0.6427 8.2491 0.0174 1.4978 0.0139 1.5117 0.3972 0.0129 0.4101 1,727.1495

1,727.1495

0.0717 1,728.9421

Total 0.9946 4.5543 9.3621 0.0254 1.6899 0.0467 1.7366 0.4525 0.0442 0.4967 2,574.9283

2,574.9283

0.1303 2,578.1864




Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Off-Road 2.5919 17.4280 13.8766 0.0220 1.0580 1.0580 1.0216 1.0216 2,030.8389

2,030.8389

0.4088 2,041.0596

Total 2.5919 17.4280 13.8766 0.0220 1.0580 1.0580 1.0216 1.0216 2,030.8389

2,030.8389

0.4088 2,041.0596






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.1380 3.6768 1.0053 7.9300e-003

0.1921 0.0259 0.2180 0.0553 0.0248 0.0801 845.0383 845.0383 0.0556 846.4293

Worker 0.7403 0.5587 7.2370 0.0169 1.4978 0.0134 1.5112 0.3972 0.0123 0.4095 1,679.9444

1,679.9444

0.0630 1,681.5196

Total 0.8783 4.2355 8.2423 0.0248 1.6899 0.0393 1.7291 0.4525 0.0371 0.4896 2,524.9826

2,524.9826

0.1187 2,527.9489



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Off-Road 2.5919 17.4280 13.8766 0.0220 1.0580 1.0580 1.0216 1.0216 0.0000 2,030.8389

2,030.8389

0.4088 2,041.0596

Total 2.5919 17.4280 13.8766 0.0220 1.0580 1.0580 1.0216 1.0216 0.0000 2,030.8389

2,030.8389

0.4088 2,041.0596






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.1380 3.6768 1.0053 7.9300e-003

0.1921 0.0259 0.2180 0.0553 0.0248 0.0801 845.0383 845.0383 0.0556 846.4293

Worker 0.7403 0.5587 7.2370 0.0169 1.4978 0.0134 1.5112 0.3972 0.0123 0.4095 1,679.9444

1,679.9444

0.0630 1,681.5196

Total 0.8783 4.2355 8.2423 0.0248 1.6899 0.0393 1.7291 0.4525 0.0371 0.4896 2,524.9826

2,524.9826

0.1187 2,527.9489


3.6 Paving - 2018


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Off-Road 1.0182 10.4525 8.9926 0.0135 0.6097 0.6097 0.5618 0.5618 1,346.4360

1,346.4360

0.4113 1,356.7186

Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 1.0182 10.4525 8.9926 0.0135 0.6097 0.6097 0.5618 0.5618 1,346.4360

1,346.4360

0.4113 1,356.7186




3.6 Paving - 2018


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.0718 0.0542 0.7021 1.6400e-003

0.1453 1.3000e-003

0.1466 0.0385 1.1900e-003

0.0397 162.9797 162.9797 6.1100e-003

163.1325

Total 0.0718 0.0542 0.7021 1.6400e-003

0.1453 1.3000e-003

0.1466 0.0385 1.1900e-003

0.0397 162.9797 162.9797 6.1100e-003

163.1325



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Off-Road 1.0182 10.4525 8.9926 0.0135 0.6097 0.6097 0.5618 0.5618 0.0000 1,346.4360

1,346.4360

0.4113 1,356.7186

Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 1.0182 10.4525 8.9926 0.0135 0.6097 0.6097 0.5618 0.5618 0.0000 1,346.4360

1,346.4360

0.4113 1,356.7186




3.6 Paving - 2018


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.0718 0.0542 0.7021 1.6400e-003

0.1453 1.3000e-003

0.1466 0.0385 1.1900e-003

0.0397 162.9797 162.9797 6.1100e-003

163.1325

Total 0.0718 0.0542 0.7021 1.6400e-003

0.1453 1.3000e-003

0.1466 0.0385 1.1900e-003

0.0397 162.9797 162.9797 6.1100e-003

163.1325


3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Archit. Coating 43.0507 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.2986 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-003

0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171

Total 43.3493 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-003

0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.1492 0.1126 1.4582 3.4000e-003

0.3018 2.6900e-003

0.3045 0.0800 2.4800e-003

0.0825 338.4963 338.4963 0.0127 338.8137

Total 0.1492 0.1126 1.4582 3.4000e-003

0.3018 2.6900e-003

0.3045 0.0800 2.4800e-003

0.0825 338.4963 338.4963 0.0127 338.8137



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Archit. Coating 43.0507 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.2986 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-003

0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.0000 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171

Total 43.3493 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-003

0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.0000 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171




4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.1492 0.1126 1.4582 3.4000e-003

0.3018 2.6900e-003

0.3045 0.0800 2.4800e-003

0.0825 338.4963 338.4963 0.0127 338.8137

Total 0.1492 0.1126 1.4582 3.4000e-003

0.3018 2.6900e-003

0.3045 0.0800 2.4800e-003

0.0825 338.4963 338.4963 0.0127 338.8137





Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Mitigated 2.4175 11.0082 31.8867 0.0963 7.2123 0.1085 7.3208 1.9305 0.1020 2.0325 9,773.0414

9,773.0414

0.5638 9,787.1365

Unmitigated 2.4175 11.0082 31.8867 0.0963 7.2123 0.1085 7.3208 1.9305 0.1020 2.0325 9,773.0414

9,773.0414

0.5638 9,787.1365

4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information

Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated MitigatedLand Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT

Apartments Mid Rise 851.20 817.92 750.08 2,843,070 2,843,070Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00 0.00

Strip Mall 253.73 240.68 116.96 442,027 442,027Total 1,104.93 1,058.60 867.04 3,285,098 3,285,098

Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %

Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by

Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3

Enclosed Parking with Elevator 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0

Strip Mall 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.60 64.40 19.00 45 40 15

4.4 Fleet Mix



5.0 Energy Detail


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



NaturalGas Mitigated

0.0497 0.4246 0.1817 2.7100e-003

0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 541.8222 541.8222 0.0104 9.9300e-003

545.0420

NaturalGas Unmitigated

0.0497 0.4246 0.1817 2.7100e-003

0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 541.8222 541.8222 0.0104 9.9300e-003

545.0420

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy

Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MHApartments Mid Rise 0.548007 0.045751 0.200309 0.124119 0.017133 0.006025 0.018861 0.028423 0.002391 0.002469 0.004915 0.000672 0.000925

Strip Mall 0.548007 0.045751 0.200309 0.124119 0.017133 0.006025 0.018861 0.028423 0.002391 0.002469 0.004915 0.000672 0.000925

Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.548007 0.045751 0.200309 0.124119 0.017133 0.006025 0.018861 0.028423 0.002391 0.002469 0.004915 0.000672 0.000925

Historical Energy Use: N



6.0 Area Detail

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas

NaturalGas Use


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day

Apartments Mid Rise

4579.61 0.0494 0.4220 0.1796 2.6900e-003

0.0341 0.0341 0.0341 0.0341 538.7775 538.7775 0.0103 9.8800e-003

541.9792

Enclosed Parking with Elevator

0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Strip Mall 25.8801 2.8000e-004

2.5400e-003

2.1300e-003

2.0000e-005

1.9000e-004

1.9000e-004

1.9000e-004

1.9000e-004

3.0447 3.0447 6.0000e-005

6.0000e-005

3.0628

Total 0.0497 0.4246 0.1817 2.7100e-003

0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 541.8222 541.8222 0.0104 9.9400e-003

545.0420

Unmitigated

NaturalGas Use


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day

Apartments Mid Rise

4.57961 0.0494 0.4220 0.1796 2.6900e-003

0.0341 0.0341 0.0341 0.0341 538.7775 538.7775 0.0103 9.8800e-003

541.9792


0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Strip Mall 0.0258801 2.8000e-004

2.5400e-003

2.1300e-003

2.0000e-005

1.9000e-004

1.9000e-004

1.9000e-004

1.9000e-004

3.0447 3.0447 6.0000e-005

6.0000e-005

3.0628

Total 0.0497 0.4246 0.1817 2.7100e-003

0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 541.8222 541.8222 0.0104 9.9400e-003

545.0420

Mitigated



6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Mitigated 3.1826 0.1232 10.6378 5.6000e-004

0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0000 19.0685 19.0685 0.0188 0.0000 19.5387

Unmitigated 3.1826 0.1232 10.6378 5.6000e-004

0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0000 19.0685 19.0685 0.0188 0.0000 19.5387



6.2 Area by SubCategory


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


SubCategory lb/day lb/day

Architectural Coating

0.2359 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Consumer Products

2.6195 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Landscaping 0.3273 0.1232 10.6378 5.6000e-004

0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 19.0685 19.0685 0.0188 19.5387

Total 3.1826 0.1232 10.6378 5.6000e-004

0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0000 19.0685 19.0685 0.0188 0.0000 19.5387

Unmitigated



8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

8.0 Waste Detail



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


SubCategory lb/day lb/day


0.2359 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Consumer Products

2.6195 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Landscaping 0.3273 0.1232 10.6378 5.6000e-004

0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 19.0685 19.0685 0.0188 19.5387

Total 3.1826 0.1232 10.6378 5.6000e-004

0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0582 0.0000 19.0685 19.0685 0.0188 0.0000 19.5387

Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad

Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment



11.0 Vegetation

Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators

Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

Boilers

Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type

User Defined Equipment

Equipment Type Number



1.1 Land Usage



Strip Mall 5.73 1000sqft 0.00 5,725.00 0



Urbanization

Climate Zone

Urban

12









9534 & 9546 Reseda Blvd. Mixed-Use ProjectLos Angeles-South Coast County, Annual


9534 & 9546 Reseda Blvd. Mixed-Use Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual

Project Characteristics - Land Use - 1.54 total lot area, 124,854 sf res. area.Grading - Demolition - Woodstoves - no hearths.Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Construction Phase - Site is fully developed and paved. No separate site prep phase.Off-road Equipment - No Site Prep PhaseOff-road Equipment - Vehicle Trips - Proposed infill project would have a negative net trip generation after credits for removal of existing uses.



















2.1 Overall Construction


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Year tons/yr MT/yr

2017 0.3394 2.7769 1.9586 4.9000e-003

0.2375 0.1207 0.3582 0.0883 0.1150 0.2033 0.0000 447.4362 447.4362 0.0560 0.0000 448.8363

2018 0.5603 0.8267 0.8315 1.7300e-003

0.0609 0.0425 0.1033 0.0163 0.0409 0.0572 0.0000 152.3549 152.3549 0.0187 0.0000 152.8231

Maximum 0.5603 2.7769 1.9586 4.9000e-003

0.2375 0.1207 0.3582 0.0883 0.1150 0.2033 0.0000 447.4362 447.4362 0.0560 0.0000 448.8363



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Year tons/yr MT/yr

2017 0.3394 2.7769 1.9586 4.9000e-003

0.1834 0.1207 0.3040 0.0604 0.1150 0.1754 0.0000 447.4360 447.4360 0.0560 0.0000 448.8361

2018 0.5603 0.8267 0.8315 1.7300e-003

0.0609 0.0425 0.1033 0.0163 0.0409 0.0572 0.0000 152.3549 152.3549 0.0187 0.0000 152.8230

Maximum 0.5603 2.7769 1.9586 4.9000e-003

0.1834 0.1207 0.3040 0.0604 0.1150 0.1754 0.0000 447.4360 447.4360 0.0560 0.0000 448.8361



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Percent Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.15 0.00 11.73 26.73 0.00 10.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00





Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Category tons/yr MT/yr

Area 0.5620 0.0154 1.3297 7.0000e-005

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

0.0000 2.1623 2.1623 2.1300e-003

0.0000 2.2157

Energy 9.0600e-003

0.0775 0.0332 4.9000e-004

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

0.0000 802.4558 802.4558 0.0186 5.1300e-003

804.4476

Mobile 0.4040 2.0293 5.4341 0.0164 1.2470 0.0192 1.2661 0.3343 0.0180 0.3523 0.0000 1,506.9853

1,506.9853

0.0894 0.0000 1,509.2204

Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 13.1721 0.0000 13.1721 0.7785 0.0000 32.6333

Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.7802 97.6943 100.4746 0.2879 7.2200e-003

109.8227

Total 0.9750 2.1222 6.7970 0.0169 1.2470 0.0327 1.2796 0.3343 0.0315 0.3659 15.9523 2,409.2978

2,425.2501

1.1764 0.0124 2,458.3396


Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)

1 4-5-2017 7-4-2017 1.3165 1.3165

2 7-5-2017 10-4-2017 0.9121 0.9121

3 10-5-2017 1-4-2018 0.9139 0.9139

4 1-5-2018 4-4-2018 0.8126 0.8126

5 4-5-2018 7-4-2018 0.5231 0.5231

Highest 1.3165 1.3165





Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Area 0.5620 0.0154 1.3297 7.0000e-005

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

0.0000 2.1623 2.1623 2.1300e-003

0.0000 2.2157

Energy 9.0600e-003

0.0775 0.0332 4.9000e-004

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

0.0000 802.4558 802.4558 0.0186 5.1300e-003

804.4476

Mobile 0.4040 2.0293 5.4341 0.0164 1.2470 0.0192 1.2661 0.3343 0.0180 0.3523 0.0000 1,506.9853

1,506.9853

0.0894 0.0000 1,509.2204

Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 13.1721 0.0000 13.1721 0.7785 0.0000 32.6333

Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.7802 97.6943 100.4746 0.2879 7.2200e-003

109.8227

Total 0.9750 2.1222 6.7970 0.0169 1.2470 0.0327 1.2796 0.3343 0.0315 0.3659 15.9523 2,409.2978

2,425.2501

1.1764 0.0124 2,458.3396



Construction Phase


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Percent Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00



Phase Number





3 Grading Grading 5/5/2017 6/29/2017 5 40


5 Paving Paving 4/6/2018 4/19/2018 5 10


OffRoad Equipment




Acres of Paving: 0
























Trips and VMT





Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Fugitive Dust 5.9100e-003

0.0000 5.9100e-003

8.9000e-004

0.0000 8.9000e-004

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.0276 0.2676 0.1556 2.4000e-004

0.0165 0.0165 0.0154 0.0154 0.0000 21.9668 21.9668 5.5600e-003

0.0000 22.1057

Total 0.0276 0.2676 0.1556 2.4000e-004

5.9100e-003

0.0165 0.0224 8.9000e-004

0.0154 0.0163 0.0000 21.9668 21.9668 5.5600e-003

0.0000 22.1057





Worker Trip Number

Vendor Trip Number

Hauling Trip Number

Worker Trip Length

Vendor Trip Length

Hauling Trip Length














Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 3.1000e-004

9.8900e-003

2.0100e-003

2.0000e-005

4.7000e-004

5.0000e-005

5.2000e-004

1.3000e-004

5.0000e-005

1.8000e-004

0.0000 2.1875 2.1875 1.6000e-004

0.0000 2.1914

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 8.2000e-004

7.1000e-004

7.5900e-003

2.0000e-005

1.4200e-003

1.0000e-005

1.4400e-003

3.8000e-004

1.0000e-005

3.9000e-004

0.0000 1.4554 1.4554 6.0000e-005

0.0000 1.4569

Total 1.1300e-003

0.0106 9.6000e-003

4.0000e-005

1.8900e-003

6.0000e-005

1.9600e-003

5.1000e-004

6.0000e-005

5.7000e-004

0.0000 3.6428 3.6428 2.2000e-004

0.0000 3.6483



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total




0.0000 2.6600e-003

4.0000e-004

0.0000 4.0000e-004

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.0276 0.2676 0.1556 2.4000e-004

0.0165 0.0165 0.0154 0.0154 0.0000 21.9668 21.9668 5.5600e-003

0.0000 22.1057

Total 0.0276 0.2676 0.1556 2.4000e-004

2.6600e-003

0.0165 0.0191 4.0000e-004

0.0154 0.0158 0.0000 21.9668 21.9668 5.5600e-003

0.0000 22.1057






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 3.1000e-004

9.8900e-003

2.0100e-003

2.0000e-005

4.7000e-004

5.0000e-005

5.2000e-004

1.3000e-004

5.0000e-005

1.8000e-004

0.0000 2.1875 2.1875 1.6000e-004

0.0000 2.1914

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 8.2000e-004

7.1000e-004

7.5900e-003

2.0000e-005

1.4200e-003

1.0000e-005

1.4400e-003

3.8000e-004

1.0000e-005

3.9000e-004

0.0000 1.4554 1.4554 6.0000e-005

0.0000 1.4569

Total 1.1300e-003

0.0106 9.6000e-003

4.0000e-005

1.8900e-003

6.0000e-005

1.9600e-003

5.1000e-004

6.0000e-005

5.7000e-004

0.0000 3.6428 3.6428 2.2000e-004

0.0000 3.6483




Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000


3.4 Grading - 2017


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Fugitive Dust 0.0925 0.0000 0.0925 0.0500 0.0000 0.0500 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.0321 0.3658 0.1407 2.8000e-004

0.0175 0.0175 0.0161 0.0161 0.0000 26.2158 26.2158 8.0300e-003

0.0000 26.4166

Total 0.0321 0.3658 0.1407 2.8000e-004

0.0925 0.0175 0.1100 0.0500 0.0161 0.0660 0.0000 26.2158 26.2158 8.0300e-003

0.0000 26.4166




3.4 Grading - 2017


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0178 0.5620 0.1144 1.2700e-003

0.0269 2.8900e-003

0.0297 7.3700e-003

2.7600e-003

0.0101 0.0000 124.2888 124.2888 8.9000e-003

0.0000 124.5113

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 1.0100e-003

8.7000e-004

9.3400e-003

2.0000e-005

1.7500e-003

2.0000e-005

1.7700e-003

4.7000e-004

2.0000e-005

4.8000e-004

0.0000 1.7912 1.7912 7.0000e-005

0.0000 1.7931

Total 0.0188 0.5629 0.1237 1.2900e-003

0.0286 2.9100e-003

0.0315 7.8400e-003

2.7800e-003

0.0106 0.0000 126.0800 126.0800 8.9700e-003

0.0000 126.3043



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Fugitive Dust 0.0416 0.0000 0.0416 0.0225 0.0000 0.0225 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.0321 0.3658 0.1407 2.8000e-004

0.0175 0.0175 0.0161 0.0161 0.0000 26.2157 26.2157 8.0300e-003

0.0000 26.4165

Total 0.0321 0.3658 0.1407 2.8000e-004

0.0416 0.0175 0.0591 0.0225 0.0161 0.0386 0.0000 26.2157 26.2157 8.0300e-003

0.0000 26.4165




3.4 Grading - 2017


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0178 0.5620 0.1144 1.2700e-003

0.0269 2.8900e-003

0.0297 7.3700e-003

2.7600e-003

0.0101 0.0000 124.2888 124.2888 8.9000e-003

0.0000 124.5113

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 1.0100e-003

8.7000e-004

9.3400e-003

2.0000e-005

1.7500e-003

2.0000e-005

1.7700e-003

4.7000e-004

2.0000e-005

4.8000e-004

0.0000 1.7912 1.7912 7.0000e-005

0.0000 1.7931

Total 0.0188 0.5629 0.1237 1.2900e-003

0.0286 2.9100e-003

0.0315 7.8400e-003

2.7800e-003

0.0106 0.0000 126.0800 126.0800 8.9700e-003

0.0000 126.3043




Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Off-Road 0.1942 1.2600 0.9404 1.4400e-003

0.0807 0.0807 0.0778 0.0778 0.0000 121.4476 121.4476 0.0255 0.0000 122.0861

Total 0.1942 1.2600 0.9404 1.4400e-003

0.0807 0.0807 0.0778 0.0778 0.0000 121.4476 121.4476 0.0255 0.0000 122.0861






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0104 0.2622 0.0765 5.2000e-004

0.0124 2.1600e-003

0.0145 3.5700e-003

2.0700e-003

5.6400e-003

0.0000 49.8249 49.8249 3.5900e-003

0.0000 49.9146

Worker 0.0551 0.0479 0.5122 1.0900e-003

0.0962 9.1000e-004

0.0971 0.0256 8.4000e-004

0.0264 0.0000 98.2583 98.2583 4.1000e-003

0.0000 98.3608

Total 0.0656 0.3100 0.5887 1.6100e-003

0.1086 3.0700e-003

0.1116 0.0291 2.9100e-003

0.0320 0.0000 148.0832 148.0832 7.6900e-003

0.0000 148.2754



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Off-Road 0.1942 1.2600 0.9404 1.4400e-003

0.0807 0.0807 0.0778 0.0778 0.0000 121.4475 121.4475 0.0255 0.0000 122.0859

Total 0.1942 1.2600 0.9404 1.4400e-003

0.0807 0.0807 0.0778 0.0778 0.0000 121.4475 121.4475 0.0255 0.0000 122.0859






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0104 0.2622 0.0765 5.2000e-004

0.0124 2.1600e-003

0.0145 3.5700e-003

2.0700e-003

5.6400e-003

0.0000 49.8249 49.8249 3.5900e-003

0.0000 49.9146

Worker 0.0551 0.0479 0.5122 1.0900e-003

0.0962 9.1000e-004

0.0971 0.0256 8.4000e-004

0.0264 0.0000 98.2583 98.2583 4.1000e-003

0.0000 98.3608

Total 0.0656 0.3100 0.5887 1.6100e-003

0.1086 3.0700e-003

0.1116 0.0291 2.9100e-003

0.0320 0.0000 148.0832 148.0832 7.6900e-003

0.0000 148.2754




Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Off-Road 0.0894 0.6013 0.4787 7.6000e-004

0.0365 0.0365 0.0352 0.0352 0.0000 63.5609 63.5609 0.0128 0.0000 63.8808

Total 0.0894 0.6013 0.4787 7.6000e-004

0.0365 0.0365 0.0352 0.0352 0.0000 63.5609 63.5609 0.0128 0.0000 63.8808






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 4.8500e-003

0.1296 0.0364 2.7000e-004

6.5200e-003

9.0000e-004

7.4200e-003

1.8800e-003

8.6000e-004

2.7400e-003

0.0000 26.1510 26.1510 1.7900e-003

0.0000 26.1958

Worker 0.0256 0.0219 0.2357 5.6000e-004

0.0507 4.6000e-004

0.0511 0.0135 4.2000e-004

0.0139 0.0000 50.3350 50.3350 1.8900e-003

0.0000 50.3823

Total 0.0305 0.1515 0.2721 8.3000e-004

0.0572 1.3600e-003

0.0585 0.0153 1.2800e-003

0.0166 0.0000 76.4860 76.4860 3.6800e-003

0.0000 76.5781



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Off-Road 0.0894 0.6013 0.4787 7.6000e-004

0.0365 0.0365 0.0352 0.0352 0.0000 63.5609 63.5609 0.0128 0.0000 63.8808

Total 0.0894 0.6013 0.4787 7.6000e-004

0.0365 0.0365 0.0352 0.0352 0.0000 63.5609 63.5609 0.0128 0.0000 63.8808






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 4.8500e-003

0.1296 0.0364 2.7000e-004

6.5200e-003

9.0000e-004

7.4200e-003

1.8800e-003

8.6000e-004

2.7400e-003

0.0000 26.1510 26.1510 1.7900e-003

0.0000 26.1958

Worker 0.0256 0.0219 0.2357 5.6000e-004

0.0507 4.6000e-004

0.0511 0.0135 4.2000e-004

0.0139 0.0000 50.3350 50.3350 1.8900e-003

0.0000 50.3823

Total 0.0305 0.1515 0.2721 8.3000e-004

0.0572 1.3600e-003

0.0585 0.0153 1.2800e-003

0.0166 0.0000 76.4860 76.4860 3.6800e-003

0.0000 76.5781


3.6 Paving - 2018


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Off-Road 5.0900e-003

0.0523 0.0450 7.0000e-005

3.0500e-003

3.0500e-003

2.8100e-003

2.8100e-003

0.0000 6.1073 6.1073 1.8700e-003

0.0000 6.1540

Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 5.0900e-003

0.0523 0.0450 7.0000e-005

3.0500e-003

3.0500e-003

2.8100e-003

2.8100e-003

0.0000 6.1073 6.1073 1.8700e-003

0.0000 6.1540




3.6 Paving - 2018


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 3.6000e-004

3.1000e-004

3.3100e-003

1.0000e-005

7.1000e-004

1.0000e-005

7.2000e-004

1.9000e-004

1.0000e-005

2.0000e-004

0.0000 0.7077 0.7077 3.0000e-005

0.0000 0.7084

Total 3.6000e-004

3.1000e-004

3.3100e-003

1.0000e-005

7.1000e-004

1.0000e-005

7.2000e-004

1.9000e-004

1.0000e-005

2.0000e-004

0.0000 0.7077 0.7077 3.0000e-005

0.0000 0.7084



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total




0.0523 0.0450 7.0000e-005

3.0500e-003

3.0500e-003

2.8100e-003

2.8100e-003

0.0000 6.1073 6.1073 1.8700e-003

0.0000 6.1540

Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 5.0900e-003

0.0523 0.0450 7.0000e-005

3.0500e-003

3.0500e-003

2.8100e-003

2.8100e-003

0.0000 6.1073 6.1073 1.8700e-003

0.0000 6.1540




3.6 Paving - 2018


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 3.6000e-004

3.1000e-004

3.3100e-003

1.0000e-005

7.1000e-004

1.0000e-005

7.2000e-004

1.9000e-004

1.0000e-005

2.0000e-004

0.0000 0.7077 0.7077 3.0000e-005

0.0000 0.7084

Total 3.6000e-004

3.1000e-004

3.3100e-003

1.0000e-005

7.1000e-004

1.0000e-005

7.2000e-004

1.9000e-004

1.0000e-005

2.0000e-004

0.0000 0.7077 0.7077 3.0000e-005

0.0000 0.7084




Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Archit. Coating 0.4305 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000


0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e-005

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e-004

0.0000 2.5593

Total 0.4335 0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e-005

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e-004

0.0000 2.5593






Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 1.5000e-003

1.2800e-003

0.0138 3.0000e-005

2.9600e-003

3.0000e-005

2.9900e-003

7.9000e-004

2.0000e-005

8.1000e-004

0.0000 2.9398 2.9398 1.1000e-004

0.0000 2.9425

Total 1.5000e-003

1.2800e-003

0.0138 3.0000e-005

2.9600e-003

3.0000e-005

2.9900e-003

7.9000e-004

2.0000e-005

8.1000e-004

0.0000 2.9398 2.9398 1.1000e-004

0.0000 2.9425



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Archit. Coating 0.4305 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000


0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e-005

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e-004

0.0000 2.5593

Total 0.4335 0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e-005

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

1.5100e-003

0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e-004

0.0000 2.5593








Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 1.5000e-003

1.2800e-003

0.0138 3.0000e-005

2.9600e-003

3.0000e-005

2.9900e-003

7.9000e-004

2.0000e-005

8.1000e-004

0.0000 2.9398 2.9398 1.1000e-004

0.0000 2.9425

Total 1.5000e-003

1.2800e-003

0.0138 3.0000e-005

2.9600e-003

3.0000e-005

2.9900e-003

7.9000e-004

2.0000e-005

8.1000e-004

0.0000 2.9398 2.9398 1.1000e-004

0.0000 2.9425





Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Mitigated 0.4040 2.0293 5.4341 0.0164 1.2470 0.0192 1.2661 0.3343 0.0180 0.3523 0.0000 1,506.9853

1,506.9853

0.0894 0.0000 1,509.2204

Unmitigated 0.4040 2.0293 5.4341 0.0164 1.2470 0.0192 1.2661 0.3343 0.0180 0.3523 0.0000 1,506.9853

1,506.9853

0.0894 0.0000 1,509.2204




Apartments Mid Rise 851.20 817.92 750.08 2,843,070 2,843,070Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00 0.00

Strip Mall 253.73 240.68 116.96 442,027 442,027Total 1,104.93 1,058.60 867.04 3,285,098 3,285,098





Strip Mall 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.60 64.40 19.00 45 40 15

4.4 Fleet Mix



5.0 Energy Detail


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Electricity Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 712.7511 712.7511 0.0168 3.4800e-003

714.2098

Electricity Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 712.7511 712.7511 0.0168 3.4800e-003

714.2098


9.0600e-003

0.0775 0.0332 4.9000e-004

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

0.0000 89.7047 89.7047 1.7200e-003

1.6400e-003

90.2378


9.0600e-003

0.0775 0.0332 4.9000e-004

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

0.0000 89.7047 89.7047 1.7200e-003

1.6400e-003

90.2378



Strip Mall 0.548007 0.045751 0.200309 0.124119 0.017133 0.006025 0.018861 0.028423 0.002391 0.002469 0.004915 0.000672 0.000925






NaturalGas Use


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr

Apartments Mid Rise

1.67156e+006

9.0100e-003

0.0770 0.0328 4.9000e-004

6.2300e-003

6.2300e-003

6.2300e-003

6.2300e-003

0.0000 89.2007 89.2007 1.7100e-003

1.6400e-003

89.7307


0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Strip Mall 9446.25 5.0000e-005

4.6000e-004

3.9000e-004

0.0000 4.0000e-005

4.0000e-005

4.0000e-005

4.0000e-005

0.0000 0.5041 0.5041 1.0000e-005

1.0000e-005

0.5071

Total 9.0600e-003

0.0775 0.0332 4.9000e-004

6.2700e-003

6.2700e-003

6.2700e-003

6.2700e-003

0.0000 89.7047 89.7047 1.7200e-003

1.6500e-003

90.2378

Unmitigated

NaturalGas Use


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Apartments Mid Rise

1.67156e+006

9.0100e-003

0.0770 0.0328 4.9000e-004

6.2300e-003

6.2300e-003

6.2300e-003

6.2300e-003

0.0000 89.2007 89.2007 1.7100e-003

1.6400e-003

89.7307


0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Strip Mall 9446.25 5.0000e-005

4.6000e-004

3.9000e-004

0.0000 4.0000e-005

4.0000e-005

4.0000e-005

4.0000e-005

0.0000 0.5041 0.5041 1.0000e-005

1.0000e-005

0.5071

Total 9.0600e-003

0.0775 0.0332 4.9000e-004

6.2700e-003

6.2700e-003

6.2700e-003

6.2700e-003

0.0000 89.7047 89.7047 1.7200e-003

1.6500e-003

90.2378

Mitigated



6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity

Electricity Use

Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr

Apartments Mid Rise

553325 308.1806 7.2800e-003

1.5100e-003

308.8114


647040 360.3764 8.5100e-003

1.7600e-003

361.1139

Strip Mall 79348.5 44.1941 1.0400e-003

2.2000e-004

44.2845

Total 712.7511 0.0168 3.4900e-003

714.2098

Unmitigated

Electricity Use



Apartments Mid Rise

553325 308.1806 7.2800e-003

1.5100e-003

308.8114


647040 360.3764 8.5100e-003

1.7600e-003

361.1139

Strip Mall 79348.5 44.1941 1.0400e-003

2.2000e-004

44.2845

Total 712.7511 0.0168 3.4900e-003

714.2098

Mitigated




6.0 Area Detail


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Mitigated 0.5620 0.0154 1.3297 7.0000e-005

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

0.0000 2.1623 2.1623 2.1300e-003

0.0000 2.2157

Unmitigated 0.5620 0.0154 1.3297 7.0000e-005

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

0.0000 2.1623 2.1623 2.1300e-003

0.0000 2.2157





Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr


0.0431 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Consumer Products

0.4781 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Landscaping 0.0409 0.0154 1.3297 7.0000e-005

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

0.0000 2.1623 2.1623 2.1300e-003

0.0000 2.2157

Total 0.5620 0.0154 1.3297 7.0000e-005

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

0.0000 2.1623 2.1623 2.1300e-003

0.0000 2.2157

Unmitigated




7.0 Water Detail



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total




0.0431 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Consumer Products

0.4781 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Landscaping 0.0409 0.0154 1.3297 7.0000e-005

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

0.0000 2.1623 2.1623 2.1300e-003

0.0000 2.2157

Total 0.5620 0.0154 1.3297 7.0000e-005

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

0.0000 2.1623 2.1623 2.1300e-003

0.0000 2.2157

Mitigated




Category MT/yr

Mitigated 100.4746 0.2879 7.2200e-003

109.8227

Unmitigated 100.4746 0.2879 7.2200e-003

109.8227

7.2 Water by Land Use

Indoor/Outdoor Use


Land Use Mgal MT/yr

Apartments Mid Rise

8.33972 / 5.25765

95.6606 0.2740 6.8700e-003

104.5568


0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Strip Mall 0.423695 / 0.259684

4.8140 0.0139 3.5000e-004

5.2659

Total 100.4746 0.2879 7.2200e-003

109.8227

Unmitigated





Indoor/Outdoor Use


Land Use Mgal MT/yr

Apartments Mid Rise

8.33972 / 5.25765

95.6606 0.2740 6.8700e-003

104.5568


0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Strip Mall 0.423695 / 0.259684

4.8140 0.0139 3.5000e-004

5.2659

Total 100.4746 0.2879 7.2200e-003

109.8227

Mitigated

8.0 Waste Detail




MT/yr

Mitigated 13.1721 0.7785 0.0000 32.6333

Unmitigated 13.1721 0.7785 0.0000 32.6333

Category/Year

8.2 Waste by Land Use

Waste Disposed


Land Use tons MT/yr

Apartments Mid Rise

58.88 11.9521 0.7064 0.0000 29.6108


0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Strip Mall 6.01 1.2200 0.0721 0.0000 3.0224

Total 13.1721 0.7785 0.0000 32.6333

Unmitigated




Waste Disposed


Land Use tons MT/yr

Apartments Mid Rise

58.88 11.9521 0.7064 0.0000 29.6108


0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Strip Mall 6.01 1.2200 0.0721 0.0000 3.0224

Total 13.1721 0.7785 0.0000 32.6333

Mitigated






Boilers






11.0 Vegetation




2

Appendix B CalEEMod2016.3.1

Computer Model Output (Zero Net Change Trip Generation)

1.1 Land Usage



Strip Mall 5.73 1000sqft 0.00 5,725.00 0



Urbanization

Climate Zone

Urban

12









9534 & 9546 Reseda Blvd. Mixed-Use ProjectLos Angeles-South Coast County, Annual



Project Characteristics - Land Use - 1.54 total lot area, 124,854 sf res. area.Grading - Demolition - Woodstoves - no hearths.Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Construction Phase - Site is fully developed and paved. No separate site prep phase.Off-road Equipment - No Site Prep PhaseOff-road Equipment - Vehicle Trips - Proposed infill project would have a negative net trip generation after credits for removal of existing uses.



































tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 8.40 0.00

tblVehicleTrips CC_TL 8.40 0.00

tblVehicleTrips CC_TTP 64.40 0.00

tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.90 0.00

tblVehicleTrips CNW_TL 6.90 0.00

tblVehicleTrips CNW_TTP 19.00 0.00

tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 16.60 0.00

tblVehicleTrips CW_TL 16.60 0.00

tblVehicleTrips CW_TTP 16.60 0.00

tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 11.00 0.00

tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 40.00 0.00




tblVehicleTrips HO_TL 8.70 0.00

tblVehicleTrips HO_TTP 40.60 0.00

tblVehicleTrips HS_TL 5.90 0.00

tblVehicleTrips HS_TTP 19.20 0.00

tblVehicleTrips HW_TL 14.70 0.00

tblVehicleTrips HW_TTP 40.20 0.00

tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 3.00 0.00

tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 15.00 0.00

tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 86.00 0.00

tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 45.00 0.00

tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 0.00

tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 42.04 0.00

tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 0.00

tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 20.43 0.00

tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 0.00

tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 44.32 0.00







2.1 Overall Construction


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Year tons/yr MT/yr

2017 0.3394 2.7769 1.9586 4.9000e-003

0.2375 0.1207 0.3582 0.0883 0.1150 0.2033 0.0000 447.4362 447.4362 0.0560 0.0000 448.8363

2018 0.5603 0.8267 0.8315 1.7300e-003

0.0609 0.0425 0.1033 0.0163 0.0409 0.0572 0.0000 152.3549 152.3549 0.0187 0.0000 152.8231

Maximum 0.5603 2.7769 1.9586 4.9000e-003

0.2375 0.1207 0.3582 0.0883 0.1150 0.2033 0.0000 447.4362 447.4362 0.0560 0.0000 448.8363



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Year tons/yr MT/yr

2017 0.3394 2.7769 1.9586 4.9000e-003

0.1834 0.1207 0.3040 0.0604 0.1150 0.1754 0.0000 447.4360 447.4360 0.0560 0.0000 448.8361

2018 0.5603 0.8267 0.8315 1.7300e-003

0.0609 0.0425 0.1033 0.0163 0.0409 0.0572 0.0000 152.3549 152.3549 0.0187 0.0000 152.8230

Maximum 0.5603 2.7769 1.9586 4.9000e-003

0.1834 0.1207 0.3040 0.0604 0.1150 0.1754 0.0000 447.4360 447.4360 0.0560 0.0000 448.8361



Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Percent Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.15 0.00 11.73 26.73 0.00 10.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00





Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Area 0.5620 0.0154 1.3297 7.0000e-005

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

0.0000 2.1623 2.1623 2.1300e-003

0.0000 2.2157

Energy 9.0600e-003

0.0775 0.0332 4.9000e-004

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

0.0000 802.4558 802.4558 0.0186 5.1300e-003

804.4476

Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 13.1721 0.0000 13.1721 0.7785 0.0000 32.6333

Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.7802 97.6943 100.4746 0.2879 7.2200e-003

109.8227

Total 0.5711 0.0929 1.3629 5.6000e-004

0.0000 0.0135 0.0135 0.0000 0.0135 0.0135 15.9523 902.3125 918.2648 1.0870 0.0124 949.1192


Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)

1 4-5-2017 7-4-2017 1.3165 1.3165

2 7-5-2017 10-4-2017 0.9121 0.9121

3 10-5-2017 1-4-2018 0.9139 0.9139

4 1-5-2018 4-4-2018 0.8126 0.8126

5 4-5-2018 7-4-2018 0.5231 0.5231

Highest 1.3165 1.3165





Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total



Area 0.5620 0.0154 1.3297 7.0000e-005

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

7.2800e-003

0.0000 2.1623 2.1623 2.1300e-003

0.0000 2.2157

Energy 9.0600e-003

0.0775 0.0332 4.9000e-004

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

6.2600e-003

0.0000 802.4558 802.4558 0.0186 5.1300e-003

804.4476

Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 13.1721 0.0000 13.1721 0.7785 0.0000 32.6333

Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.7802 97.6943 100.4746 0.2879 7.2200e-003

109.8227

Total 0.5711 0.0929 1.3629 5.6000e-004

0.0000 0.0135 0.0135 0.0000 0.0135 0.0135 15.9523 902.3125 918.2648 1.0870 0.0124 949.1192



Construction Phase


Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total


Percent Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00



Phase Number





3 Grading Grading 5/5/2017 6/29/2017 5 40


5 Paving Paving 4/6/2018 4/19/2018 5 10


OffRoad Equipment




Acres of Paving: 0
























Trips and VMT





Exhaust PM10

PM10 Total

Fugitive PM2.5

Exhaust PM2.5

PM2.5 Total




0.0000 5.9100e-003

8.9000e-004

0.0000 8.9000e-004

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.0276 0.2676 0.1556 2.4000e-004

0.0165 0.0165 0.0154 0.0154 0.0000 21.9668 21.9668 5.5600e-003

0.0000 22.1057

Total 0.0276 0.2676 0.1556 2.4000e-004

5.9100e-003

0.0165 0.0224 8.9000e-004

0.0154 0.0163 0.0000 21.9668 21.9668 5.5600e-003

0.0000 22.1057





Worker Trip Number

Vendor Trip Number

Hauling Trip Number

Worker Trip Length

Vendor Trip Length

Hauling Trip Length










