Beverly Hills City Council
August 1, 2023

AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: August 1, 2023
Item Number:

To: Honorable Mayor & City Council
From: Jeffrey Lambert, FAICP, Interim Director of Community Development Subject: HEARING DATE FOR AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S JUNE 22, 2023 DECISION APPROVING A

DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW AND DENSITY BONUS PERMIT TO

ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SIX-STORY, MIXED

USE DEVELOPMENT WITH GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL USES,
105 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AT 55 NORTH LA CIENEGA

BOULEVARD
Attachments: 1. Appeal Petition

2. Draft Planning Commission Resolution No. 2028

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council schedule an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision approving a Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit to allow the construction of a new mixed use development at property located at 55 North La Cienega Boulevard for the City Council meeting scheduled for September 12, 2023.

DISCUSSION
On June 22, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution (Attachment 2) approving a Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit to allow for the construction of a six-story mixed use development with rooftop bathrooms at the property located at 55 North La Cienega Boulevard (the “project site”). The project site is currently developed with a vacant commercial building with a surface parking lot that was formerly used for restaurant uses (“The Stinking Rose”). The project includes the demolition of the existing vacant commercial building and the construction of a mixed use project with ground floor retail spaces and 105 residential dwelling units for rental above the ground floor, 11 units of which would be reserved for very low-income households. The Commission’s approval of the Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Meeting Date: August 1, 2023

Permit included incentives/concessions, as permitted by California Government Code §65915 (“State Density Bonus Law”), to accommodate the provision of the 11 proposed affordable housing units. The incentives/concessions included the following:
• Building Height: Increased the building height from 45’ to 66’-6”; • Number of Stories: Increased the number of stories from three to six; and • Rear Setbacks: Reduced the rear building setback on the third and fourth floors from 20’ to 16’
On July 5, 2023, Lozeau Drury LLP, on behalf of Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (“SAFER”), filed a timely appeal of the Commission’s decision, seeking that the City Council require additional environmental review for the project (Attachment 1). Specifically, the appellant states that the project would have a significant impact on air quality as they assert that the project would likely expose future residents living at the project to significant impacts related to indoor air quality, and in particular, emissions of the cancer-causing chemical formaldehyde that may be present in modern building materials.

PROCESS
Pursuant to Beverly Hill Municipal Code (BHMC) Section 1-4-105, the procedure for appeals of Planning Commission decisions to the City Council is a two-step process. The matter is first placed on the Council agenda for review of the evidence presented in the appeal petition. If the evidence and information presented in the appeal is the same as was presented to the Commission, the Council can then set a public hearing to consider the appeal. However, if the appeal petition contains new information, the Council may order that the Commission rehear the matter.

Based on the appeal received by the City, it appears that the appeal is based on new information that was previously not considered nor presented to the Commission as part of the original project approval. While BHMC Section 1-4-105 provides an option for the City Council to order the Commission to rehear the matter on the basis that new information was provided, staff recommends that the Council move forward on the consideration of the appeal due to limitations in the number of public meetings allowed by state law for housing development projects.

Specifically, pursuant to Government Code §65905.5(a), the City is limited to five (5) total public hearings on a housing development project after it has been deemed complete. Inclusive of the prior Planning Commission meeting and this Council meeting to set the appeal date, two out of the five allotted meetings afforded by state law have been exhausted.

In order to retain sufficient public hearings for the Council appeal hearing and future review by the Architectural Commission, staff recommends that the Council formally schedule this matter for formal public hearing on September 12, 2023 to consider the appeal.

Meeting Date: August 1, 2023

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no anticipated fiscal impact to the City, as this agenda item only intends to schedule a hearing date for an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision.

Jeffrey Lambert, FAICP
Interim Director of Community Development
Approved By
ATTACHMENT 1
Appeal Petition

BEU HILLS CITY CLERK
2023JUL5pm12:47
APPEAL PEXmONS MUST BE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE WITHIN 14 CALENDARDAYS AFTER THE DATE OF THE DEaSION
APPEAL TO COMMISSION OR^nT COUNCg^
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT CLEARLY IN BLACK INK.

Date
In accordance with the appeals procedine as authorized by the provisions of the Beverly Hills Municipal Code, the undersigned hereby appeals from the decision of the Planning Commission (Official, Board or Commission involved) rendered on Tune 22 2023 ; which decision consisted of:

The grounds submitted for this appeal are as follows: (WARNING: State aU grounds for appeal Describe how decision is inconsistent with law. Use extra paper ifnecessary.) Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility ("SAFER") appeals the Planning Commission's approval of the 55 North La Cienega Boulevard Project (Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit No. PL2100326). The grounds for SAFER's appeal are set forth in the attached letter. See attachment.

The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed with:

Michael Dunn -V June 27, 2023
(Department Head(s) Involved) ^ Date
It is requested that written notice of the time and place for the hearing on this appeal before the City Council be sent to:

Rebecca Davis, Lozeau Drury LLP 1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150, Oakland. CA 94612 ■ Name (representing Appellant SAFER) Address
Signati^ of appealing party
1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150, Oakland, CA 94612
Address
510-836-4200
Telephone Number & Fax Number
Fee Paid ZmIT'oo ' (For City Clerk's use) DATE RECEIVED ^ ^ LOG NO. / ? / ^3 Written Notice mailed to appellant:

Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, C lA l\J iVy f Involved Department

ATTACHMENT
LOZEAU DRURY-lp
1 J
T 510.836.4200
F 510.836.4205
1939 Harrison Slreel. Ste. 150
Oakland. CA 94612
www.l02eaudfury.com
richardlSsiozeaudrury.com
July 3, 2023
Via Email
Mayor Julian A. Gold
Vice Mayor Lester Friedman
Councilmember John A. Mirisch
Councilmember Lili Bosse
Councilmember Sharona R. Nazarian
[email protected]
Edgar Arroyo, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
City of Beverly Hills
455 North Rexford Drive
Beverly Hills, California 90210
earrovo@,beverlvhills.org
Re: Appeal of Planning Commission Approval for 55 N. La Cienega Boulevard Project (Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit No. PL2100326)
Dear Mayor Gold and Honorable Members of the City Council:

This comment is submitted on behalf of Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility C'SAFER"), regarding the 55 North La Cienega Boulevard Project (Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit No. PL2100326), which proposes the construction of a five-story mixed-use development with 105 residential dwelling units, ground floor commercial uses, and rooftop restrooms, located at 55 North La Cienega Boulevard in the City of Beverly Hills ("Project"). The City of Beverly Hills ("City") must fully comply with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") prior to any approvals in furtherance of the Project. SAFER hereby appeals the Planning Commission's approval of the Project which was issued on June 22, 2023, and asks you to overtum the Approvals issued pending further CEQA review.

As discussed below, exempting the Project from CEQA based on the Class 32 Exemption violates CEQA because the terms of the Class 32 exemption do not apply. Since the Project is not exempt from CEQA, an initial study must be prepared to determine the appropriate level of CEQA review required.

DISCUSSION
A. The City Incorrectly Applied CEQA's Class 32 In-Fill Development Categorical Exemption to the Project and Thus a Full CEQA Analysis Is Required.

The proposed Project does not qualify for a Class 32 In-fill Development Categorical Exemption under CEQA because of the Project's potentially significant environmental 55 N. La Cienega Boulevard Project
City of Beverly Hills
July 3,2023

impacts. The City must prepare an Initial Study to determine the appropriate level of CEQA review.

The Class 32 exemption provides:

Class 32 consists of projects characterized as in-fill development meeting the conditions described in this section.
(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
(c) The project site has no value, as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffiCy noise, air quality, or water quality. (e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
14 CCR § 15332 [emph. added].

One of the key limitations of the Exemption is that it does not apply if the project will have any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. 14 CCR § 15332(d). Here, the Exemption cannot apply because the Project will have a significant impact on air quality.

1. Indoor Air Quality
Certified Industrial Hygienist, Francis "Bud" Offermann, PE, CIH, has reviewed the proposed exemption and all relevant documents regarding the Project's indoor air emissions.

Based on this review, Mr. Offermann concludes that the Project will likely expose future residents living at the Project to significant impacts related to indoor air quality, and in particular, emissions of the cancer-causing chemical formaldehyde. Mr. Offermann is a leading expert on indoor air quality and has published extensively on the topic. Mr.

Offermann's CV and expert comments are attached as Exhibit A.

Formaldehyde is a known human carcinogen and is listed by the State of California as a Toxic Air Contaminant ("TAC"). The South Coast Air Quality Management District ("SCAQMD"), the agency responsible for regulating air quality within the South Coast Air Basin—^which includes the City of Beverly Hills—^has established a cancer risk significance threshold from human exposure to carcinogenic TACs of 10 per million. (Ex. A., p. 2.) 55 N. La Cienega Boulevard Project
City of Beverly Hills
July 3,2023

Mr. Offermann explains that many composite wood products routinely used in indoor building materials and furnishings commonly found in offices, residences, and hotels contain formaldehyde-based glues which off-gas formaldehyde over long periods of time. He states that "[t]he primary source of formaldehyde indoors is composite wood products manufactured with urea-formaldehyde resins, such as plywood, medium density fiberboard, and particleboard. These materials are commonly used in building construction for flooring, cabinetry, baseboards, window shades, interior doors, and window and door trims." {Id., pp. 2-3.)
Mr. Offermann concludes that future residents of the proposed Project will be exposed to a cancer risk from formaldehyde of approximately 120 per million, even assuming that all furnishing materials are compliant with the California Air Resources Board's formaldehyde airborne toxics control measure. {Id., p. 4.) This risk level is 12 times greater than the SCAQMD's CEQA significance threshold for airborne cancer risk of 10 per million.

The California Supreme Court has emphasized the importance of air district significance thresholds in providing substantial evidence of a significant adverse environmental impact under CEQA. {Communities for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310, 327 ["As the [South Coast Air Quality Management] District's established significance threshold for NOx is 55 pounds per day, these estimates [of NOx emissions of 201 to 456 pounds per day] constitute substantial evidence supporting a fair argument for a significant adverse impact."].) Since expert evidence demonstrates that the Project will exceed the SCAQMD's CEQA significance threshold, there is substantial evidence that an "unstudied, potentially significant environmental effect[]" exists. (See, Friends of College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College Dist. (2016) 1 Cal.5th 937, 958.) Mr. Offermann concludes that these significant impacts should be further mitigated to reduce the significant health risks that will result from indoor formaldehyde emissions. {Id., pp. 12-14.) Mr. Offermann proposes various feasible mitigation measures to reduce these impacts, including by imposing a requirement that the Project applicant install high-capacity air filters throughout the building and commit to using only composite wood materials that are made with CARB approved no-added formaldehyde (NAF) resins, or ultra-low emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins, for all of the buildings' interior spaces.

Mr. Offermann's observations constitute substantial evidence that the Project will produce potentially significant air quality and health impacts which the exemption has failed to address. Therefore, the City must prepare an initial study to further evaluate and mitigate these impacts to the Project's future residents.

CONCLUSION
55 N. La Cienega Boulevard Project
City of Beverly Hills
July 3, 2023

The City cannot rely on a Class 32 exemption because the Project does not meet the terms of the exemption. Accordingly, the City must prepare an initial study to determine the appropriate level of environmental review to undertake pursuant to CEQA. Thank you for considering these comments.

Sincerely,
Rebecca Davis
Lozeau | Drury LLP

EXHIBIT A

TKK INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING EEE
1448 Pine Street, Suite 103 San Francisco, California 94109 Telephone: (415) 567-7700
E-mail: [email protected]
httD://w\v\v. iee-sf.com
Date: June 30, 2023
To: Adam Franke!
Lozeau ] Drury LLP
1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150
Oakland, California 94612
From: Francis J. Offermann PE CIH
Subject: Indoor Air Quality: 55 N. La Cienega Boulevard Project, Los Angeles, CA (lEE File Reference: P-4727)
Pages: 19
Indoor Air Quality Impacts
Indoor air quality (lAQ) directly impacts the comfort and health of building occupants, and the achievement of acceptable lAQ in newly constructed and renovated buildings is a well-recognized design objective. For example, lAQ is addressed by major highperformance building rating systems and building codes (California Building Standards Commission, 2014; USGBC, 2014). Indoor air quality in homes is particularly important because occupants, on average, spend approximately ninety percent of their time indoors with the majority of this time spent at home (EPA, 2011). Some segments of the population that are most susceptible to the effects of poor lAQ, such as the very young and the elderly, occupy their homes almost continuously. Additionally, an increasing number of adults are working from home at least some of the time during the workweek.

Indoor air quality also is a serious concern for workers in hotels, offices and other business establishments.

The concentrations of many air pollutants often are elevated in homes and other buildings relative to outdoor air because many of the materials and products used indoors contain and release a variety of pollutants to air (Hodgson et al., 2002; Offermann and Hodgson, 2011). With respect to indoor air contaminants for which inhalation is the primary route of exposure, the critical design and construction parameters are the provision of adequate ventilation and the reduction of indoor sources of the contaminants.

Indoor Formaldehyde Concentrations Impact. In the California New Home Study (CNHS) of 108 new homes in California (Offermann, 2009), 25 air contaminants were measured, and formaldehyde was identified as the indoor air contaminant with the highest cancer risk as determined by the California Proposition 65 Safe Harbor Levels (OEHHA, 2017a), No Significant Risk Levels (NSRL) for carcinogens. The NSRL is the daily intake level calculated to result in one excess case of cancer in an exposed population of 100,000 (i.e., ten in one million cancer risk) and for formaldehyde is 40 pg/day. The NSRL concentration of formaldehyde that represents a daily dose of 40 pg is 2 pg/m^, assuming a continuous 24-hour exposure, a total daily inhaled air volume of 20 m^, and 100% absorption by the respiratory system. All of the CNHS homes exceeded this NSRL concentration of 2 pg/m^. The median indoor formaldehyde concentration was 36 pg/m^, and ranged from 4.8 to 136 pg/m^, which corresponds to a median exceedance of the 2 pg/m^ NSRL concentration of 18 and a range of 2.3 to 68.

Therefore, the cancer risk of a resident living in a California home with the median indoor formaldehyde concentration of 36 pg/m^, is 180 per million as a result of formaldehyde alone. The CEQA significance threshold for airborne cancer risk is 10 per million, as established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD, 2015).

Besides being a human carcinogen, formaldehyde is also a potent eye and respiratory irritant. In the CNHS, many homes exceeded the non-cancer reference exposure levels (RELs) prescribed by California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA, 2017b). The percentage of homes exceeding the RELs ranged from 98% for the Chronic REL of 9 pg/m^ to 28% for the Acute REL of 55 pg/m^.

The primary source of formaldehyde indoors is composite wood products manufactured with urea-formaldehyde resins, such as plywood, medium density fiberboard, and 2 of 19
particleboard. These materials are commonly used in building construction for flooring, cabinetry, baseboards, window shades, interior doors, and window and door trims.

In January 2009, the California Air Resources Board (GARB) adopted an airborne toxics control measure (ATCM) to reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, including hardwood plywood, particleboard, medium density fiberboard, and also furniture and other finished products made with these wood products (California Air Resources Board 2009). While this formaldehyde ATCM has resulted in reduced emissions from composite wood products sold in California, they do not preclude that homes built with composite wood products meeting the CARB ATCM will have indoor formaldehyde concentrations below cancer and non-cancer exposure guidelines.

A follow up study to the California New Home Study (CNHS) was conducted in 2016- 2018 (Singer et. al., 2019), and found that the median indoor formaldehyde in new homes built after 2009 with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials had lower indoor formaldehyde concentrations, with a median indoor concentrations of 22.4 pg/m^ (18.2 ppb) as compared to a median of 36 pg/m^ found in the 2007 CNHS. Unlike in the CNHS study where formaldehyde concentrations were measured with pumped DNPH samplers, the formaldehyde concentrations in the HENGH study were measured with passive samplers, which were estimated to under-measure the true indoor formaldehyde concentrations by approximately 7.5%. Applying this correction to the HENGH indoor formaldehyde concentrations results in a median indoor concentration of 24.1 pg/m^, which is 33% lower than the 36 pg/m^ found in the 2007 CNHS.

Thus, while new homes built after the 2009 CARB formaldehyde ATCM have a 33% lower median indoor formaldehyde concentration and cancer risk, the median lifetime cancer risk is still 120 per million for homes built with CARB compliant composite wood products. This median lifetime cancer risk is more than 12 times the OEHHA 10 in a million cancer risk threshold (OEHHA, 2017a).

With respect to the 55 N. La Cienega Boulevard Project, Los Angeles, CA the buildings consist of commercial spaces.
3 of 19
The employees of the commercial spaces are expected to experience significant indoor exposures (e.g., 40 hours per week, 50 weeks per year). These exposures for employees are anticipated to result in significant cancer risks resulting from exposures to formaldehyde released by the building materials and furnishing commonly found in offices, warehouses, residences and hotels.

Because the commercial spaces will be constructed with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials, and be ventilated with the minimum code required amount of outdoor air, the indoor formaldehyde concentrations are likely similar to those concentrations observed in residences built with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials, which is a median of 24.1 pg/m^ (Singer et. al., 2020)
Assuming that the employees of commercial spaces work 8 hours per day and inhale 20 m^ of air per day, the formaldehyde dose per work-day at the offices is 161 pg/day.

Assuming that these employees work 5 days per week and 50 weeks per year for 45 years (start at age 20 and retire at age 65) the average 70-year lifetime formaldehyde daily dose is 70.9 pg/day.

This is 1.77 times the NSRL (OEHHA, 2017a) of 40 pg/day and represents a cancer risk of 17.7 per million, which exceeds the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million. This impact should be analyzed in an environmental impact report ("EIR"), and the agency should impose all feasible mitigation measures to reduce this impact. Several feasible mitigation measures are discussed below and these and other measures should be analyzed in an EIR.

In addition, we note that the average outdoor air concentration of formaldehyde in California is 3 ppb, or 3.7 pg/m^, (California Air Resources Board, 2004), and thus represents an average pre-existing background airborne cancer risk of 1.85 per million.

Thus, the indoor air formaldehyde exposures describe above exacerbate this pre-existing risk resulting from outdoor air formaldehyde exposures. 4 of 19
Additionally, the SCAQMD's Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study ("MATES V") identifies an existing cancer risk at the Project site of 473 per million due to the site's elevated ambient air contaminant concentrations, which are due to the area's high levels of vehicle traffic. These impacts would further exacerbate the pre-existing cancer risk to the building occupants, which result from exposure to formaldehyde in both indoor and outdoor air.

Appendix A, Indoor Formaldehyde Concentrations and the GARB Formaldehyde ATOM, provides analyses that show utilization of GARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATGM materials will not ensure acceptable cancer risks with respect to formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products.

Even composite wood products manufactured with GARB certified ultra low emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins do not insure that the indoor air will have concentrations of formaldehyde the meet the OEHHA cancer risks that substantially exceed 10 per million.

The permissible emission rates for ULEF composite wood products are only 11-15% lower than the GARB Phase 2 emission rates. Only use of composite wood products made with no-added formaldehyde resins (NAF), such as resins made from soy, polyvinyl acetate, or methylene diisocyanate can insure that the OEHHA cancer risk of 10 per million is met.

The following describes a method that should be used, prior to construction in the environmental review under GEQA, for determining whether the indoor concentrations resulting from the formaldehyde emissions of specific building materials/furnishings selected exceed cancer and non-cancer guidelines. Such a design analyses can be used to identify those materials/furnishings prior to the completion of the Gity's GEQA review and project approval, that have formaldehyde emission rates that contribute to indoor concentrations that exceed cancer and non-cancer guidelines, so that alternative lower emitting materials/furnishings may be selected and/or higher minimum outdoor air ventilation rates can be increased to achieve acceptable indoor concentrations and incorporated as mitigation measures for this project.
5 of 19
Pre-Construction Building Material/Furnishing Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment This formaldehyde emissions assessment should be used in the environmental review under CEQA to assess the indoor formaldehyde concentrations from the proposed loading of building materials/furnishings, the area-specific formaldehyde emission rate data for building materials/furnishings, and the design minimum outdoor air ventilation rates. This assessment allows the applicant (and the City) to determine, before the conclusion of the environmental review process and the building materials/furnishings are specified, purchased, and installed, if the total chemical emissions will exceed cancer and non-cancer guidelines, and if so, allow for changes in the selection of specific material/furnishings and/or the design minimum outdoor air ventilations rates such that cancer and non-cancer guidelines are not exceeded.

1.) Define Indoor Air Quality Zones. Divide the building into separate indoor air quality zones, (lAQ Zones). lAQ Zones are defined as areas of well-mixed air. Thus, each ventilation system with recirculating air is considered a single zone, and each room or group of rooms where air is not recirculated (e.g. 100% outdoor air) is considered a separate zone. For lAQ Zones with the same construction material/furnishings and design minimum outdoor air ventilation rates, (e.g. hotel rooms, apartments, condominiums, etc.) the formaldehyde emission rates need only be assessed for a single lAQ Zone of that type.

2.) Calculate Material/Furnishing Loading. For each lAQ Zone, determine the building material and furnishing loadings (e.g., m^ of material/m^ floor area, units of fumishings/m^ floor area) from an inventory of all potential indoor formaldehyde sources, including flooring, ceiling tiles, furnishings, finishes, insulation, sealants, adhesives, and any products constructed with composite wood products containing ureaformaldehyde resins (e.g., plywood, medium density fiberboard, particleboard).

3.) Calculate the Formaldehvde Emission Rate. For each building material, calculate the formaldehyde emission rate (pg/h) from the product of the area-specific formaldehyde emission rate (pg/m^-h) and the area (m^) of material in the LAQ Zone, and from each 6 of 19
furnishing (e.g. chairs, desks, etc.) from the unit-specific formaldehyde emission rate (pg/unit-h) and the number of units in the lAQ Zone.

NOTE: As a result of the high-performance building rating systems and building codes (California Building Standards Commission, 2014; USGBC, 2014), most manufacturers of building materials fumishings sold in the United States conduct chemical emission rate tests using the California Department of Health "Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers," (CDPH, 2017), or other equivalent chemical emission rate testing methods. Most manufacturers of building fumishings sold in the United States conduct chemical emission rate tests using ANSI/BIFMA M7.1 Standard Test Method for Determining VOC Emissions (BIFMA, 2018), or other equivalent chemical emission rate testing methods.

CDPH, BIFMA, and other chemical emission rate testing programs, typically certify that a material or fumishing does not create indoor chemical concentrations in excess of the maximum concentrations permitted by their certification. For instance, the CDPH emission rate testing requires that the measured emission rates when input into an office, school, or residential model do not exceed one-half of the OEHHA Chronic Exposure Guidelines (OEHHA, 2017b) for the 35 specific VOCs, including formaldehyde, listed in Table 4-1 of the CDPH test method (CDPH, 2017). These certifications themselves do not provide the actual area-specific formaldehyde emission rate (i.e., pg/m^-h) of the product, but rather provide data that the formaldehyde emission rates do not exceed the maximum rate allowed for the certification. Thus, for example, the data for a certification of a specific type of flooring may be used to calculate that the area-specific emission rate of formaldehyde is less than 31 pg/m^-h, but not the actual measured specific emission rate, which may be 3, 18, or 30 pg/m^-h. These area-specific emission rates determined from the product certifications of CDPH, BIFA, and other certification programs can be used as an initial estimate of the formaldehyde emission rate.

If the actual area-specific emission rates of a building material or fumishing is needed (i.e. the initial emission rates estimates from the product certifications are higher than desired), then that data can be acquired by requesting from the manufacturer the complete 7 of 19
chemical emission rate test report. For instance if the complete CDPH emission test report is requested for a CDHP certified product, that report will provide the actual areaspecific emission rates for not only the 35 specific VOCs, including formaldehyde, listed in Table 4-1 of the CDPH test method (CDPH, 2017), but also all of the cancer and reproductive/developmental chemicals listed in the California Proposition 65 Safe Harbor Levels (OEHHA, 2017a), all of the toxic air contaminants (TACs) in the California Air Resources Board Toxic Air Contamination List (CARB, 2011), and the 10 chemicals with the greatest emission rates.

Alternatively, a sample of the building material or furnishing can be submitted to a chemical emission rate testing laboratory, such as Berkeley Analytical Laboratory ("https://berkelevanalvtical.comL to measure the formaldehyde emission rate.

4.) Calculate the Total Formaldehvde Emission Rate. For each lAQ Zone, calculate the total formaldehyde emission rate (i.e. pg/h) from the individual formaldehyde emission rates from each of the building material/furnishings as determined in Step 3.

5.) Calculate the Indoor Formaldehvde Concentration. For each lAQ Zone, calculate the indoor formaldehyde concentration (pg/m^) from Equation 1 by dividing the total formaldehyde emission rates (i.e. pg/h) as determined in Step 4, by the design minimum outdoor air ventilation rate (mVh) for the lAQ Zone.

Qn = (Equation 1)
where:

Cin = indoor formaldehyde concentration (pg/m^)
Etotai = total formaldehyde emission rate (pg/h) into the lAQ Zone.

Qoa = design minimum outdoor air ventilation rate to the lAQ Zone (mVh) The above Equation I is based upon mass balance theory, and is referenced in Section

3.10.2 "Calculation of Estimated Building Concentrations" of the California Department of Health "Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers", (CDPH, 2017). 8 of 19

6.) Calculate the Indoor Exposure Cancer and Non-Cancer Health Risks. For each lAQ Zone, calculate the cancer and non-cancer health risks from the indoor formaldehyde concentrations determined in Step 5 and as described in the OEHHA Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines; Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments (OEHHA, 2015).

7.) Mitigate Indoor Formaldehyde Exposures of exceeding the CEOA Cancer and/or Non-Cancer Health Risks. In each lAQ Zone, provide mitigation for any formaldehyde exposure risk as determined in Step 6, that exceeds the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million or the CEQA non-cancer Hazard Quotient of 1.0.

Provide the source and/or ventilation mitigation required in all lAQ Zones to reduce the health risks of the chemical exposures below the CEQA cancer and non-cancer health risks.

Source mitigation for formaldehyde may include:

1.) reducing the amount materials and/or furnishings that emit formaldehyde

2.) substituting a different material with a lower area-specific emission rate of formaldehyde
Ventilation mitigation for formaldehyde emitted from building materials and/or furnishings may include:

1.) increasing the design minimum outdoor air ventilation rate to the lAQ Zone.

NOTE: Mitigating the formaldehyde emissions through use of less material/furnishings, or use of lower emitting materials/furnishings, is the preferred mitigation option, as mitigation with increased outdoor air ventilation increases initial and operating costs associated with the heating/cooling systems.

Further, we are not asking that the builder "speculate" on what and how much composite materials be used, but rather at the design stage to select composite wood materials based 9 of 19
on the formaldehyde emission rates that manufacturers routinely conduct using the California Department of Health "Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers," (CDPH, 2017), and use the procedure described earlier above (i.e. PreConstruction Building Material/Furnishing Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment) to insure that the materials selected achieve acceptable cancer risks from material off gassing of formaldehyde.

Outdoor Air Ventilation Impact. Another important finding of the CNHS, was that the outdoor air ventilation rates in the homes were very low. Outdoor air ventilation is a very important factor influencing the indoor concentrations of air contaminants, as it is the primary removal mechanism of all indoor air generated contaminants. Lower outdoor air exchange rates cause indoor generated air contaminants to accumulate to higher indoor air concentrations. Many homeowners rarely open their windows or doors for ventilation as a result of their concerns for security/safety, noise, dust, and odor concerns (Price, 2007). In the CNHS field study, 32% of the homes did not use their windows during the 24-hour Test Day, and 15% of the homes did not use their windows during the entire preceding week. Most of the homes with no window usage were homes in the winter field session.

Thus, a substantial percentage of homeowners never open their windows, especially in the winter season. The median 24-hour measurement was 0.26 air changes per hour (ach), with a range of 0.09 ach to 5.3 ach. A total of 67% of the homes had outdoor air exchange rates below the minimum California Building Code (2001) requirement of 0.35 ach. Thus, the relatively tight envelope construction, combined with the fact that many people never open their windows for ventilation, results in homes with low outdoor air exchange rates and higher indoor air contaminant concentrations.

According to the Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report - 55 North La Cienega Boulevard Project (City of Beverly Hills, 2023) the Project is close to roads with moderate to high traffic (e.g., N. La Cienega Boulevard, Wilshire Boulevard, N. Le Doux Road, San Vincente Boulevard, etc.). As a result the Project site is a sound impacted site. 10 of 19
Table 1 in Appendix C of the Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report - 55 North La Cienega Boulevard Project (City of Beverly Hills. 2023) reports that the existing noise levels range from 56.1 to 70.0 dBA Leq. However these noise measurements are just short-term 15 minute measurements made on a single day, Wendsday, March 8, 2023, and do not report the CNEL or Ldn dBA sound levels. In order to design the building such that the interior noise levels are acceptable, long-term one-week measurements need to be conducted to assess the ambient CNEL or Ldn dBA sound levels for the purpose of selecting the appropriate STC for the windows.

As a result of the high outdoor noise levels, the current project will require a mechanical supply of outdoor air ventilation to allow for a habitable interior environment with closed windows and doors. Such a ventilation system would allow windows and doors to be kept closed at the occupant's discretion to control exterior noise within building interiors.

PM2.S Outdoor Concentrations Impact. An additional impact of the nearby motor vehicle traffic associated with this project, are the outdoor concentrations of PM2.5.

According to the Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report - 55 North La Cienega Boulevard Project (City of Beverly Hills. 2023), the Project is located in the South Coast Air Basin, which is a State and Federal non-attainment area for PM2.5.

An air quality analyses should to be conducted to determine the concentrations of PM2.5 in the outdoor and indoor air that people inhale each day. This air quality analyses needs to consider the cumulative impacts of the project related emissions, existing and projected future emissions from local PM2.5 sources (e.g. stationary sources, motor vehicles, and airport traffic) upon the outdoor air concentrations at the Project site. If the outdoor concentrations are determined to exceed the California and National annual average PM2.5 exceedence concentration of 12 pg/m^, or the National 24-hour average exceedence concentration of 35 pg/m^, then the buildings need to have a mechanical supply of outdoor air that has air filtration with sufficient removal efficiency, such that the indoor concentrations of outdoor PM2.5 particles is less than the California and National PM2.5 annual and 24-hour standards.

II of 19
It is my experience that based on the projected high traffic noise levels, the annual average concentration of PM2.5 will exceed the California and National PM2.5 annual and 24-hour standards and warrant installation of high efficiency air filters (i.e. MERV 13 or higher) in all mechanically supplied outdoor air ventilation systems.

Indoor Air Quality Impact Mitigation Measures
The following are recommended mitigation measures to minimize the impacts upon indoor quality:

Indoor Formaldehvde Concentrations Mitigation. Use only composite wood materials (e.g. hardwood plywood, medium density fiberboard, particleboard) for all interior finish systems that are made with CARB approved no-added formaldehyde (NAF) resins (CARB, 2009). CARB Phase 2 certified composite wood products, or ultra-low emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins, do not insure indoor formaldehyde concentrations that are below the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million. Only composite wood products manufactured with CARB approved no-added formaldehyde (NAF) resins, such as resins made from soy, polyvinyl acetate, or methylene diisocyanate can insure that the GEHHA cancer risk of 10 per million is met.

Alternatively, conduct the previously described Pre-Construction Building Material/Furnishing Chemical Emissions Assessment, to determine that the combination of formaldehyde emissions from building materials and furnishings do not create indoor formaldehyde concentrations that exceed the CEQA cancer and non-cancer health risks.

It is important to note that we are not asking that the builder "speculate" on what and how much composite materials be used, but rather at the design stage to select composite wood materials based on the formaldehyde emission rates that manufacturers routinely conduct using the California Department of Health "Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers", (CDPH, 2017), and use the procedure described above (i.e.

Pre-Construction Building Material/Furnishing Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment) to 12 of 19
insure that the materials selected achieve acceptable cancer risks from material off gassing of formaldehyde.

Outdoor Air Ventilation Mitigation. Provide each habitable room with a continuous mechanical supply of outdoor air that meets or exceeds the California 2016 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (California Energy Commission, 2015) requirements of the greater of 15 cfm/occupant or 0.15 cfm/ft^ of floor area. Following installation of the system conduct testing and balancing to insure that required amount of outdoor air is entering each habitable room and provide a written report documenting the outdoor airflow rates. Do not use exhaust only mechanical outdoor air systems, use only balanced outdoor air supply and exhaust systems or outdoor air supply only systems. Provide a manual for the occupants or maintenance personnel, that describes the purpose of the mechanical outdoor air system and the operation and maintenance requirements of the system.

PM2S Outdoor Air Concentration Mitigation. Install air filtration with sufficient PMz.s removal efficiency (e.g. MERV 13 or higher) to filter the outdoor air entering the mechanical outdoor air supply systems, such that the indoor concentrations of outdoor PM2,5 particles are less than the California and National PM25 annual and 24-hour standards. Install the air filters in the system such that they are accessible for replacement by the occupants or maintenance personnel. Include in the mechanical outdoor air ventilation system manual instructions on how to replace the air filters and the estimated frequency of replacement.

References
BIFA. 2018. BIFMA Product Safety and Performance Standards and Guidelines. www.bifma.org/page/standardsoverview
California Air Resources Board. 2009. Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Reduce Formaldehyde Emissions from Composite Wood Products. California Environmental 13 of 19
Protection Agency, Sacramento, CA.
httDs://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/compwood07/fro-rinal.pdf California Air Resources Board. 2011. Toxic Air Contaminant Identification List.

California Environmental Protection Agency, Sacramento, CA. httDs://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/id/taclist.htm
California Building Code. 2001. California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2 Volume 1, Appendix Chapter 12, Interior Environment, Division 1, Ventilation, Section 1207:
2001 California Building Code, California Building Standards Commission. Sacramento, CA.

California Building Standards Commission (2014). 2013 California Green Building Standards Code. California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11. California Building Standards Commission, Sacramento, CA http://www.bsc.ca.gov/Home/CALGreen.aspx.

California Energy Commission, PIER Program. CEC-500-2007-033. Final Report, ARB Contract 03-326. Available at: ww\v.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/03-326.pdf.

California Energy Commission, 2015. 2016 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6. http://www.energv.ca.gov/2015Dublications/CEC-40Q-2015-037/CEC-400-2015-037- CMF.pdf
CDPH. 2017. Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers, Version 1.1.

California Department of Public Health, Richmond, CA.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/ DEODC/EHLB/IAQ/Pages/VOC.aspx.

City of Beverly Hills. 2023. Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report - 55 North La Cienega Boulevard Project.
14 of 19
EPA. 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition, Chapter 16 - Activity Factors.

Report EPA/600/R-09/052F, September 2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

Hodgson, A. T., D. Beal, J.E.R. Mcllvaine. 2002. Sources of formaldehyde, other aldehydes and terpenes in a new manufactured house. Indoor Air 12: 235-242.

OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines; Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.

OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2017a. Proposition 65 Safe Harbor Levels. No Significant Risk Levels for Carcinogens and Maximum Allowable Dose Levels for Chemicals Causing Reproductive Toxicity. Available at:
http://www.oehha.ca.aov/prop65/pdf/safeharbor081513.pdf OEHHA - Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2017b. All OEHHA Acute, 8-hour and Chronic Reference Exposure Levels. Available at:
http://oehha.ca.gov/air/allrels.html
Offermann, F. J. 2009. Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality in New Homes. Califomia Air Resources Board and Califomia Energy Commission, PIER Energy-Related Environmental Research Program. Collaborative Report. CEC-500-2009-085. https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/04-310.pdf
Offermann, F. J. and A. T. Hodgson. 2011. Emission Rates of Volatile Organic Compounds in New Homes. Proceedings Indoor Air 2011 (12'^ Intemational Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate 2011), June 5-10, 2011, Austin, TX.

Singer, B.C, Chan, W.R, Kim, Y., Offermann, F.J., and Walker l.S. 2020. Indoor Air Quality in California Homes with Code-Required Mechanical Ventilation. Indoor Air, Vol 30, Issue 5, 885-899.
15of 19
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2015. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Handbook. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, CA, http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/airqualitv-analvsis-handbook USGBC. 2014. LEED BD+C Homes v4. U.S. Green Building Council, Washington, D.C. http://www.usgbc.org/credits/homes/v4
16ofl9

APPENDIX A

INDOOR FORMALDEHYDE CONCENTRATIONS

AND THE

CARB FORMALDEHYDE ATCM
With respect to formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, the CARB ATCM regulations of formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, do not assure healthful indoor air quality. The following is the stated purpose of the CARB ATCM regulation - The purpose of this airborne toxic control measure is to "reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, and finished goods that contain composite wood products, that are sold, offered for sale, supplied, used, or manufactured for sale in California In other words, the CARB ATCM regulations do not "assure healthful indoor air quality", but rather "reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products".

Just how much protection do the CARB ATCM regulations provide building occupants from the formaldehyde emissions generated by composite wood products? Definitely some, but certainly the regulations do not assure healthful indoor air quality" when CARB Phase 2 products are utilized. As shown in the Chan 2019 study of new California homes, the median indoor formaldehyde concentration was of 22.4 pg/m^ (18.2 ppb), which corresponds to a cancer risk of 112 per million for occupants with continuous exposure, which is more than 11 times the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million.

Another way of looking at how much protection the CARB ATCM regulations provide building occupants from the formaldehyde emissions generated by composite wood products is to calculate the maximum number of square feet of composite wood product that can be in a residence without exceeding the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million for occupants with continuous occupancy.

For this calculation I utilized the floor area (2,272 ft^), the ceiling height (8.5 ft), and the number of bedrooms (4) as defined in Appendix B (New Single-Family Residence Scenario) of the Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers, Version 1.1, 2017, Califomia 17 of 19
Department of Public Health, Richmond, CA. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/ DEODC/EHLB/IAQ/Pages/VOC.aspx.

For the outdoor air ventilation rate I used the 2019 Title 24 code required mechanical ventilation rate (ASHRAE 62.2) of 106 cfm (180 m^/h) calculated for this model residence.

For the composite wood formaldehyde emission rates I used the CARB ATCM Phase 2 rates.

The calculated maximum number of square feet of composite wood product that can be in a residence, without exceeding the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million for occupants with continuous occupancy are as follows for the different types of regulated composite wood products.

Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF) - 15 ft^ (0.7% of the floor area), or Particle Board - 30 ft^ (1.3% of the floor area), or
Hardwood Plywood - 54 fP (2.4% of the floor area), or
Thin MDF - 46 ft^ (2.0 % of the floor area).

For offices and hotels the calculated maximum amount of composite wood product (% of floor area) that can be used without exceeding the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million for occupants, assuming 8 hours/day occupancy, and the California Mechanical Code minimum outdoor air ventilation rates are as follows for the different types of regulated composite wood products.

Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF) - 3.6 % (offices) and 4.6% (hotel rooms), or Particle Board - 7.2 % (offices) and 9.4% (hotel rooms), or Hardwood Plywood - 13 % (offices) and 17% (hotel rooms), or Thin MDF - 11 % (offices) and 14 % (hotel rooms)
Clearly the CARB ATCM does not regulate the formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products such that the potentially large areas of these products, such as for flooring, baseboards, interior doors, window and door trims, and kitchen and bathroom cabinetry. 18 of 19
could be used without causing indoor formaldehyde concentrations that result in CEQA cancer risks that substantially exceed 10 per million for occupants with continuous occupancy.

Even composite wood products manufactured with CARB certified ultra low emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins do not insure that the indoor air will have concentrations of formaldehyde the meet the OEHHA cancer risks that substantially exceed 10 per million.

The permissible emission rates for ULEF composite wood products are only 11-15% lower than the CARB Phase 2 emission rates. Only use of composite wood products made with no-added formaldehyde resins (NAF), such as resins made from soy, polyvinyl acetate, or methylene diisocyanate can insure that the OEHHA cancer risk of 10 per million is met.

If CARB Phase 2 compliant or ULEF composite wood products are utilized in construction, then the resulting indoor formaldehyde concentrations should be determined in the design phase using the specific amounts of each type of composite wood product, the specific formaldehyde emission rates, and the volume and outdoor air ventilation rates of the indoor spaces, and all feasible mitigation measures employed to reduce this impact (e.g. use less formaldehyde containing composite wood products and/or incorporate mechanical systems capable of higher outdoor air ventilation rates). See the procedure described earlier (i.e. Pre-Construction Building Material/Furnishing Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment) to insure that the materials selected achieve acceptable cancer risks from material off gassing of formaldehyde.

Altematively, and perhaps a simpler approach, is to use only composite wood products (e.g. hardwood plywood, medium density fiberboard, particleboard) for all interior finish systems that are made with CARB approved no-added formaldehyde (NAF) resins. 19 of 19
9/25/2018 Indoor Environmental Engineering - Expert Witness Services: Francis (Bud) Offermann PE CiH, Indoor Air Quaiity, Buiiding Science, lAQ lEE Indoor Environmental Engineering
Your iiuloor air ijuaiity fxpcrtf
Horns
Company Profile
Healthy Building Servlcee
Diagrtostic Services
Laboratory Services
Worlcshops & Seminars
Expert Wtness Services
Resources
News & Events
Employnwnt
Contact Us
Expert Witness Services
Francis (Bud) J. Offermann PE CiH
President: Indoor Environmental Engineering,
San Francisco. CA. December, 1981 - present,
e-mail: [email protected]
Education
• M.S. Mechanical Engineering Stanford University, Stanford, OA. • Graduate Studies in Air Pollution Monitoring and Control University of Califbmia, Berkeley. CA.
• B.S. in Mechanical Engineering Rensselaer Polytechnic Instttuts, Troy, N.Y.

Professional Affiliations
ACGIH, AIHA, ASHRAE, CSI, ASTM, ISIAQ, PARMA, and USGBC Work Experience
Mr. Offermann PE, CIH. has 36 years experience as en lAQ researcher, technical author, and workshop instructor. He is president of Indoor Environmental Engineering, a San Francisco based lAQ R&D consulting firm.

As president of indoor Environmental Englneen'ng, Mr. Offermann directs an interdisciplinary team of environmental scientists, chemists, and mechanical engineers in indoor air quality building Investigations. Under Mr. Offermann's supervision, lEE has developed both pro-active and reactive lAQ measurement methods and diagnostic protocols. He has supeninsed over 2,000 lAQ investigations in commercial, residential, and institutional buildings and conducted numerous forensic investigations related to lAQ.

Litigation Experience
Mr. Offermann has been qualified numerous times in court as an expert in the field of Indoor air quality and ventllafion for both plaintiffe and defendants. He has been deposed over ISO times in cases Involving indoor air quality/ventilation Issues in commercial, residential, and institutional buildings involving consbuction defects, and/or operation and maintenance problems.

Examples of Indoor air quality cases he has worked on are alleged personal injury and/or property damages from mold and bacterial
contamination/moisture Intrusion, building renovation activities, insufficient outdoor air ventHation, off gassing of voiatlle organic compounds from building materials and coatings, malfunctioning gas heaters and carbon monoxide poisoning, and applications of pesticides. Mr. Offennann has testified vrith respect to the sclenbfic admlssabllity of expert testimony regarding Indoor air quality issues via Daubert and Kelly-Frye motions.

View Curriculum Vitae
(PDF)
Copyright 2006 Indoor Envkonmental EnginMrlng. SIto design OyhtrrBTechnolooyhttp://www.lee-sf.com/expert-witness-servic88/lndex.html 1/1 ExpressNetwork
A Lt(",AL SUPPORT NETWORK COMPANY
www.Cfxpressnetworkas.com
Service of Process Work Order
[email protected]
(888) 232-6077
Assigned To
LA. PROCESS DEPT
QC#; 0013244
Date: 07/05/23
Client Information
Firm Name: L02EAU DRURY LLP.

Address: 1939 HARRISON ST., #150
City/St/Zip: OAKLAND , CA 94612
lei,#: (510) 836-4200 Fax (510) 836-4205
Secretary: Molly Greene Ref. 1847
Court / Case Info
Court Name: NONE
Case Number: NONE
Plaintiff; NONE
Defendant: NONE

SERVICE INFORMATION

SPECIAL
SERVICE TYPE NEED STATUS BY 07/05/23 (Attempt immediately.) LAST DAY TO SERVE PERSON/ENTITY TO BE SERVED: CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: Agent: CITY CLERKS OFFICE
ADDRESS 455 N. REXFORD DR. #290
CITY/ZIP BEVERLY HILLS , CA 90210

ALTERNATE

ADDRESS

CITY/ZIP
BUSINESS [g RESIDENCE Q BUSINESS Q RESIDENCE Q]

DOCUMENTS

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
PLEASE SERVE ASAP WITH CLIENTS CHECK.

Server Report
Log Date Time Server Code Comments
•"lanner: [Bj Cancel and Return To [£] Sheriff to Serve [N] No Attempt [R] Returned Not Served [TJ By Posting [V] Posted at Business [D] Rejected Documents [H] On Hold Per Client [P] Personal Service [S] Substituted Service [U] Posted at Residence fW) Warm Body CCP lOll Date Served: Time Served: Served By: Served At:

Person Served: Title:

Relationship: Race: Sex: Age: Hair: Eyes: Height: Weight:

By Leaving Copies With: Witness Fees: $
Mailed From: Mailed Date:

ATTACHMENT 2
Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2028
RESOLUTION NO. 2028

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF

THE CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS CONDITIONALLY

APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW AND
DENSITY BONUS PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A NEW SIXSTORY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL USES, 105 RESIDENTIAL

DWELLING UNITS ON THE SECOND THROUGH FIFTH

STORIES, AND ROOFTOP RESTROOMS ON THE SIXTH
STORY AT 55 NORTH LA CIENEGA BOULEVARD
(PL2200289)
The Planning Commission of the City of Beverly Hills hereby finds, resolves and determines as follows:

Section 1. Abraham Assil, on behalf of 55 Del Norte, LLC, (collectively the “Applicant”) has submitted an application for a Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit to allow the construction of a new six-story, mixed use building with ground floor commercial uses, 105 multi-family residential dwelling units above the ground floor, and rooftoprestrooms with an overall height of (66’-6”, and a Density Bonus Permit to allow for a 50% density bonus in addition to certain incentives/concessions from development standards to provide 11 affordable housing units (the “Project”). Pursuant to Beverly Hills Municipal Code (BHMC) §§10- 3-3100.A and 10-3-1524, a Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit are required to construct the new multi-family residential building.

Section 2. The Project consists of the construction of a new six-story mixeduse building, with ground floor commercial uses and 105 residential dwelling units located above the ground floor level. The Project would replace an existing 13,500 SF vacant commercial building formerly used as a restaurant with approximately 18,986 SF of new ground-floor DRAFT
2 commercial area consisting of retail, restaurant, and market/eatery type uses. The residential portion of the Project consists of rental units, with 11 units reserved for very low-income households. The Project would provide 102 one-bedroom units that range between 678 SF and 1,012 SF, along with three efficiency units (studios) of 571 SF. The new building is proposed to be built to the front property line along North La Cienega Boulevard, but would include portions of the building that are modulated and set back to break up the massing of the building, while also providing depth and articulation of the building facade. On the ground floor, the proposed restaurant, café, and market/eatery uses would be set back approximately 17’-0’ from the front property line to create areas for open air dining opportunities and promote pedestrian-oriented activities. On the north side of the building, a 5’-0” side setback is provided. On the south side, the ground floor of the building will be built to the side property line, with upper stories setback 5’-0” from the side property line. At the rear, a 10’-0” rear setback is provided on the first two floors of the building, with the setback increasing to 20’-0” to the building face on the third to fifth floor.

On the third and fourth floors of the Project, the applicant is proposing balconies that Project 4’- 0” from the rear face of the building and setback 16’-0” from the rear property line. Common outdoor living space for the residential uses would be provided on the rooftop of the building, along with amenities consisting of a pool, spa, rooftop restrooms, trellis shade structures, and landscaping to assist in screening the neighboring single-family residential uses to the west, along North Le Doux Road from the outdoor living area. Additional common and private outdoor living areas are provided within balconies located on the second floor of the Project. The new mixed-use building is proposed at a maximum height of 66’-6”, which includes the six-story portion of the building housing the commercial and residential uses at a height of 57’-0”, along with approximately 450 SF of rooftop bathroom areas on the north and south sides of the building with DRAFT
3 a height of 9’-6”. Parking for the commercial and residential uses would be provided within a three-level subterranean parking structure that would be accessed by two new-driveways located along North La Cienega Boulevard, providing access to a total of 196 parking spaces. Parking for the commercial portion of the Project would be located on the ground floor, as well as on levels P1 and P2 of the subterranean parking garage. Parking for the residential portion of the Project is provided on level P3. Of the 196 parking spaces proposed, 130 spaces will be allocated for the commercial portion of the Project and 66 parking spaces will be allocated to the residential portion.

The Project site is a 38,500 SF rectangular lot located on the west side of North La Cienega Boulevard, within the City’s C-3, Commercial Zone and MU, Mixed Use Overlay Zone.

Discretionary development plan review approval from the Planning Commission is required for the construction of the new building, and the requested density bonus permit.

The Project also includes the following components as it pertains to density bonus laws:

Density Bonus: State density bonus standards allow for a certain percentage increase in density, which is based on the proportion of units of the site’s base density (i.e., the maximum number of units allowed under General Plan and Beverly Hills Municipal Code (BHMC) density standards without the inclusion of bonus units) that are designated as affordable housing units. In the case of the Project, the number of base units that may be built under the City’s General Plan and BHMC is 70 units and the number of affordable housing units proposed are 11 units (very low income), resulting in an overall affordable unit percentage of 15.7%. The density bonus standards state that whenever 15% or more of a project’s base density is designated as affordable to very low-income households, a 50% increase in density shall be provided and all density calculations are required to be DRAFT
4 rounded up to the next whole number. Therefore, approval of the Density Bonus Permit, with the inclusion of 11 affordable housing units, will allow for a maximum density of 105 units.

Development Incentives/Concessions: Pursuant to state density bonus law, development projects where at least 15% of the base units are affordable to very lowincome households are entitled to three development incentives/concessions (hereafter referred to as concessions), which result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs or for rents of project’s affordable housing units.

Separately, an Applicant may also request waivers from development standards that have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development at the densities allowed or with the concessions permitted. Concessions and waives must be granted unless such a request would cause a specific adverse public health or safety impact, harm historical property, or would be contrary to any state or federal laws. Waivers do not count as a concession and there is no limit on the number of development standard waivers that may be requested or granted provided each would preclude development at the densities allowed or with the concessions permitted. Accordingly, the incentives/concessions and waivers requested by the Applicant are as follows:

Concessions:

1. Building Height: BHMC §§10-3-1880 and 10-3-2804 establish the maximum allowable height for development proposed in the City’s MU Overlay Zone. The Project site is located in Height District A and subject to a maximum allowable height of DRAFT
5 45’. The applicant is requesting an incentive/concession to allow additional height (21’- 6”) for a total maximum building height of 66’-6”.

2. Number of Stories: BHMC §§10-3-1880 and 10-3-2804 establish the maximum number of stories allowed for development proposed in the City’s MU Overlay Zone. The Project site is located in Height District A and subject to a maximum of three (3) stories. The Applicant is requesting an incentive/concession to allow an additional three stories, inclusive of the 450 SF of rooftop restrooms, which are considered the sixth story to the building pursuant to the height provisions of the BHMC.

3. Rear Setbacks: BHMC §10-3-1952.B. establishes the required setbacks for development of projects located in the City’s Commercial-Residential Transition Area.

Pursuant to this section, a 20’-0” rear setback is required for the portion of a building over two stories/30’-0” in height. The applicant is requesting an incentive/concession to allow for a reduction in the required rear setback on the third and fourth floors of the Project to allow for the balconies proposed for the units on these floors to encroach 4’-0” into the required setback area. The proposal would reduce the required setback on the third and fourth floors from 20’-0” to 16’-0”.

Waivers: None
Alternative Parking Standards: Assembly Bill (AB) 2097, which became effective on January 1, 2023, prohibits public agencies from imposing or enforcing any minimum automobile parking requirement on certain residential, commercial, or other development projects that are located within ½ mile of a major transit stop. The project site is located within ½-mile of the future Metro Purple (D Line) Station, which is currently under construction on the northeast corner of Wilshire Boulevard and North La Cienega DRAFT
6 Boulevard. Prior to this change in state law, this project would have been required to provide a total 149 parking spaces. Although pursuant to AB 2097, no parking could be required for this project the applicant is proposing to provide 196 parking spaces. The applicant has designed the Project to provide parking for the ground floor commercial uses on levels P1 and P2 of the subterranean parking garage, with a total of 149 parking provided for commercial uses. Parking for the residential portion of the project would be provided exclusively on level P3, with 66 parking spaces provided on this level that would be only accessible to residents of the building. Only residents of the building will have key card access to an entry and exit gate located on level P2 to access the residential parking on level P3. The applicant anticipates there would be tenants of the building that would choose to not have an automobile due to existing and future available public transit. As such, the applicant proposes to have residential parking available on a first-come first-served basis to tenants requesting a parking space as part of their lease. Once a tenant adds parking as part of their lease, then a specific parking space would be assigned to that unit within the P3 parking level. The parking spaces would be made available on equal terms to all tenants, regardless of income level, and subject to availability.

Section 3. This Project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.), and the environmental regulations of the City. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Class 32 Exemption report prepared for the Project, and based on that analysis finds that the request is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.

A Class 32 Categorical Exemption is applicable to the construction of in-fill development projects.

DRAFT
7 Therefore, the Planning Commission hereby finds the Project exempt from further review under CEQA.

Section 4. Notice of the Project and public hearing was mailed on June 2, 2023 to all property owners and residential occupants within a 500-foot radius of the property, extended to the block face. An on-site posted notice was displayed on the property beginning on June 2, 2023. On June 22, 2023, the Planning Commission considered the application at a duly noticed public hearing. Evidence, both oral and written, was presented at said hearing.

Section 5. In considering the request for approval of a Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit, pursuant to Section 10-3-3104 of the Beverly Hills Municipal Code (BHMC), the Planning Commission considered whether it could make the following findings in support of the Project:

1. The proposed plan is consistent with the general plan and any specific plans adopted for the area.

2. The proposed plan will not adversely affect existing and anticipated development in the vicinity and will promote harmonious development of the area.

3. The nature, configuration, location, density, height and manner of operation of any commercial development proposed by the plan will not significantly and adversely interfere with the use and enjoyment of residential properties in the vicinity of the subject property.

4. The proposed plan will not create any significantly adverse traffic impacts, traffic safety hazards, pedestrian-vehicle conflicts, or pedestrian safety hazards.

5. The proposed plan will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare.

DRAFT
8 Section 6. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines as follows with respect to the Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit:

1. The Project, as authorized by the State Density Bonus Statute, meets all applicable zoning requirements and has been determined to be consistent with the applicable requirements and guidance of the General Plan for mixed use development located within the MU, Mixed Use Development Overlay Zone and the C-3, Commercial Zone. Additionally, the Project’s height and density are based on the allowable heights and densities of the General Plan, Beverly Hills Municipal Code, and deviations as permitted under State Density Bonus Statute. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the General Plan. Furthermore, the Project is not located within any specific plans adopted for the area.

2. There are no active requests for discretionary planning approval of new commercial, multi-family, or single-family residences within 500’ of the Project site.

Additionally, the Project would be required to submit a construction management plan during building plan check to ensure that the proposed work would not adversely affect planning improvements to the construction of the Metro Purple (D Line) station on the northeast corner of Wilshire Boulevard and La Cienega Boulevard. The proposed Project would intensify development on the Project site and it may result in changes visible to the streetscape that may appear out of character with the existing commercial area, due to the proposed increase in height and reduced setbacks; however, it is unlikely to inhibit the future development of nearby properties. As future development within the City’s mixed use overlay area occurs, it is likely that, over time, new developments that are proposed in the mixed use overlay zone would include designs that are similar in scale and mass to the proposed Project. The proposed Project is also not expected to exhibit any long-lasting DRAFT
9 impacts on existing nearby development because it is consistent with the applicable General Plan policies and standards and because existing development to the south of the Project site is larger in scale than the proposed Project, with a nine- and an 11-story building developed on properties located on the corner of Wilshire Boulevard and La Cienega Boulevard. Existing commercial development directly adjacent to the north, south, and west of the Project site consists of three-story commercial buildings with an approximately height of 45’. As such, the Project, as conditioned, will not adversely affect existing and anticipated development in the vicinity and will promote harmonious development of the area.

3. The proposed mixed use Project provides commercial uses exclusively on the ground floor of the Project. The upper stories of the Project would be occupied by multi-family residential uses and not commercial uses. The commercial portion of the Project is not designed with any publicly accessible openings to the rear or sides of the property to avoid any potential to cause noise or privacy impacts to neighboring singlefamily residential properties to the rear along North Le Doux Road. The commercial uses are designed to be oriented toward North La Cienega Boulevard. Additionally, all vehicular and loading access would occur from North La Cienega Boulevard, with vehicular access area not open or visible to adjacent commercial or residential properties to the north, south, or west. As such, the nature, configuration, location, density, height and manner of operation of the commercial portion of the development proposed would not significantly and adversely interfere with the use and enjoyment of residential properties in the vicinity of the subject property.

DRAFT
10 4. As provided in Section 3.4 (Page 14) in the CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report (Attachment I of the June 22, 2023 Planning Commission staff report), the proposed project is screened out from providing a traffic analysis per the City’s adopted Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) thresholds because it is located within a Transit Priority Area (TPA) due to the proximity to the Metro Purple (D Line) station on the northeast corner of Wilshire Boulevard and La Cienega Boulevard. Additionally, while not required for CEQA, a Local Transportation Assessment (LTA) was prepared for the project to evaluate level of service (LOS) impacts during peak hours at signalized intersections (Appendix B of Attachment I of the June 22, 2023 Planning Commission staff report). The intersections evaluated as part of this study were located at: 1) La Cienega Boulevard and San Vicente Boulevard; 2) La Cienega Boulevard and Wilshire Boulevard; and, 3) La Cienega Boulevard and Olympic Boulevard. The LTA determined that the increases in intersection delays at the study intersections would be relatively small (0.0 to 1.1 seconds) and that the project is not expected to substantially or adversely increase delays at any of the study intersections. The minor increases in delay at the study intersections fall below the thresholds established by the City for identifying potential adverse conditions at locations operating at LOS D or worse, so no improvements would be required at the study intersections as a result of the project. Pedestrian and vehicle access to the project site would continue to be provided by North La Cienega Boulevard. The project would include the construction of new driveway aprons in compliance with City’s driveway standards to improve ingress and egress to the project site. As detailed in the LTA, no improvements to the existing roadway would be required as a result of the project and the project would not alter the existing traffic patterns along the North La Cienega Boulevard roadway. As such, DRAFT
11 no design changes would be introduced that would introduce sharp curves, dangerous intersections, or incompatible on-site uses. Furthermore, implementation of the project would not create new obstructions to emergency access in the project area. Therefore, the proposed project would not create any significantly adverse traffic impacts, traffic safety hazards, pedestrian-vehicles conflicts, or pedestrian safety hazard.

5. The Project site is located within a Commercial-Residential Transition Area. Therefore, the Project must be consistent with regulations that require the implementation of certain design features, which include: a setback from residential properties, construction of site walls, and installation of landscaping to provide a buffer between the project and the adjacent single-family residential properties to the west. The proposed rooftop area is setback from the edge or the roof and landscaped to provide visual screening to obscure views from the rooftop into the adjacent single family residential area and minimize privacy impacts on the residential properties to the west. Additionally, as conditioned, the project incorporates measures to minimize noise and operational impacts associated with commercial uses located in proximity to residential uses. As such, the project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare.

Section 7. In evaluating the Project, the Planning Commission considered whether the Project meets the following objectives of the Mixed Use Overlay Zone, pursuant to Section 10-3-1872 of the BHMC, as detailed below:

1. Expanding the options and opportunities for certain commercial property owners and developers by allowing for combinations of commercial uses, and multi-family residential uses subject to specific standards, rules and procedures.

DRAFT
12 2. Creating the potential for more intensive development in certain neighborhoods, while maintaining realistic buffers between commercial and residential zones to ensure there is harmonious development in the area.

3. Expanding housing options for diverse socioeconomic populations in the City including seniors, young people, populations that wish to be transit-adjacent and populations that will benefit from development near an urban core.

4. Retaining the commercial tax base and streetscape character that exists in the City by encouraging neighborhood-serving and pedestrian-friendly commercial uses.

5. Concentrating new housing and amenities near existing and anticipated transportation nodes and stations to encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation to automobile travel.

6. Allowing projects that are appropriately designed to achieve the desired neighborhood character, while providing development standards to minimize impacts of commercial uses to adjacent residential zones, and to encourage symbiotic uses.

Section 8. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines as follows with respect to the objectives of the Mixed Use Overlay Zone:

1. The proposed project seeks to redevelop an existing vacant and underutilized commercial property for new mixed use development that includes pedestrian-serving retail and restaurant uses, as well as new multi-family residential rental housing stock. The project would provide 18,986 SF of new commercial uses on the ground floor that would serve the proposed residential uses on the property and properties in the vicinity of the project site. A residential portion of the project would provide a total of 105 new dwelling units, 11 units of which will be reserved for rental to very low-income DRAFT
13 households. In all, the project provides a combination of commercial and multi-family uses at the project site in designed in compliance with the applicable development standards in the MU Overlay Zone and state density bonus law.

2. The proposed project is designed to provide for more intensive development on an existing commercial corridor known as the city’s “Restaurant Row”. The project would replace an existing one-story, 13,500 SF vacant commercial building formerly used as a restaurant, with a mix of neighborhood servicing retail, market, and restaurant uses on the ground floor facing North La Cienega Boulevard. Approximately, 18,986 SF of new commercial floor area would be provided on the first floor, with 105 new dwelling units provided on the second through fifth floors of the project. The project is designed with varying building setbacks at the rear of the property that would provide a buffer between the existing single-family residential uses located to the west of the project site and the project’s proposed commercial and residential uses. At the rear, a 10’-0” rear setback is provided on the first two floors of the building, with the setback increasing to 20’-0” to the building face on the third to fifth floors. On the third and fourth floors of the project, the applicant is proposing balconies that project 4’-0” from the rear face of the building and would provide a 16’-0” setback from the rear property line. The rear yard would be planted with various species of landscaping material proposed at varied maximum heights between 8’ and 30’ tall. When mature, the proposed landscaping would contribute to providing privacy for the neighboring residential properties. Lastly, a new 6’-0” tall block wall is also proposed at the rear of the project site that would provide additional screening between properties.

DRAFT
14 3. The project promotes the expansion of housing options for diverse socioeconomic populations in the city by providing 105 new dwelling units, with 94 units proposed as market-rate rental housing and 11 dwelling units reserved for rental to very low-income households. The location of the project and its proximity to public transportation may encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation to automobile travel.

4. The project would provide 18,986 SF of new commercial uses on the ground floor that would serve the proposed residential uses on the property and properties in the vicinity of the project site. The proposed ground floor commercial uses consisting of retail and restaurant uses with open air dining areas on private property would serve the proposed residential units on the project site and other residents and workers located in the vicinity of the project. The project’s ground floor commercial uses retain the project site’s contribution to the City’s commercial tax base. The project’s pedestrian accessible ground floor commercial also retains the streetscape character of pedestrian-oriented activity along La Cienega Boulevard.

5. The project would provide 105 new dwelling units located in close proximity to existing and proposed public transit stops. The project would be served by existing Metro bus lines that travel along Wilshire Boulevard and La Cienega Boulevard and would also be served by the future Metro Purple (D Line) station currently under construction on the northeast corner of Wilshire Boulevard and La Cienega Boulevard, which is located approximately 130 feet (0.02 miles) from the project site. The location of the project and its proximity to public transportation may encourage the use of alternative modes of transposition to automobile travel.

DRAFT
15 6. The proposed project would provide a mix of new pedestrian-serving commercial uses and new multi-family residential uses that are design to meet the desired character and purpose of the MU Overlay zone by providing for mixed use development to encourage vibrant, walkable neighborhoods, increase the availability of housing, and preserving the vitality of existing commercial corridors. The project would introduce new retail, market, and restaurant uses that would serve nearby commercial and residential uses near the vicinity of the project, as well the future residential tenants of the proposed 105 dwelling units in the development. The project is designed in compliance with the applicable development standards in the MU Overlay Zone and state density bonus law and is designed to provided landscaped building setbacks at the rear of the project site to provide a buffer between the neighboring residential properties to the west of the project site.

Section 9. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves the requested Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit associated with the construction the new six-story mixed use development Project with ground floor commercial uses, 105 dwelling units, and rooftop bathrooms at 55 North La Cienega Boulevard, subject to the following conditions:

Project-Specific Conditions

1. The Planning Commission hereby approves the requested concessions for building height, number of stories, and rear setback requirements. The total height shall not exceed 66’-6”, inclusive of the rooftop restrooms. The number of stories shall not exceed six stories, inclusive of the rooftop restrooms; no residential units shall be located above the fifth story. The rear setback shall be 20’-0” on all floors of the building, as DRAFT
16 measured from the rear property line to the face of the building. However, the proposed balconies located on the third and fourth of the rear of the building shall per permitted to encroach a maximum of 4’-0” into the required 20’-0” setback. In no event shall the balconies on the third and fourth floor maintain less than a 16’-0” rear yard setback, as measured from the rear property line to the nearest edge of the balcony.

2. This approval is for those plans submitted to the Planning Commission on June 22, 2023, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of approval.

3. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of Community Development or her/his designee. A significant change to the approved Project shall be subject to Planning Commission review.

4. Project Plans are subject to compliance with all applicable zoning regulations, except as may be expressly modified herein. Project plans shall be subject to a complete Code Compliance review when building plans are submitted for plan check.

Compliance with all applicable Municipal Codes is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Further, the Project shall comply with all prerequisites to the issuance of a demolition permit as set forth in the Municipal Code and these conditions of approval before any such demolition permit shall be issued.

5. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the design, materials, and finish of the building and landscaping shall be subject to the review and approval by the Architectural Commission.

DRAFT
17 6. Landscaping shall be maintained for the life of the Project in substantial compliance with the landscape plan included in the approved plans. The landscaping hedges proposed at the rear of the property shall be installed with sufficient height to reach a height of 40’ within one-year from the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy of the building. Any modification to landscaping shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director or his/her designee for a consistency determination with the original approval.

7. The Project shall be operated as a rental property and shall maintain a minimum of eleven (11) one-bedroom dwelling units designated for occupancy by very low-income households. The City of Beverly Hills or its designee shall be responsible for administering these units. Affordability of these units by said households shall be guaranteed for a minimum of 55 years and subject to a recorded affordability restriction for a minimum of 55 years in accordance with Cal. Govt. Code Section 65915 or its successor statute.

8. The Applicant shall record covenants and/or deed restrictions as determined by the City Attorney to ensure that the rental price of the affordable housing units does not exceed an amount determined to be affordable to very low-income households. Very lowincome households are defined in Cal. Govt. Code Section 50079.5 and the California Department of Housing and Community Development provides a process for determining affordable housing costs. The covenants and/or restrictions on the affordable housing shall be in effect for a period of not less than 55 years.

9. An inclusionary housing agreement which includes provisions and terms for meeting the requirements of the City’s inclusionary housing requirements shall be DRAFT
18 approved by the city manager and city attorney, and recorded as a deed restriction against the property prior to issuance of either a grading or building permit, whichever comes first.

10. The occupants of the affordable housing units within the Project shall have the same access to the common entrances, common areas, and amenities, including parking, as the occupants of the market-rate housing units and the affordable housing units shall not be isolated to a specific floor or an area on a specific floor. Further, the affordable housing unit shall have the same number and type of appliances as the non-affordable housing units, which shall include, at a minimum, one (1) refrigerator, one (1) washer, and one (1) dryer.

11. To mitigate potential noise impacts to neighboring residents, use of the roof deck areas shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Sunday. Signage indicating such restrictions shall be installed on the rooftop.

12. Amplified music and voices shall be prohibited on the rooftop.

13. Lighting on the Project site, including rooftop areas, shall comply at all times with the Beverly Hills Municipal Code’s restrictions on lighting of premises.

14. All outdoor living spaces for the project, including those provided on balconies and the rooftop areas shall only be made available for use by Project residents and their guests. No commercial occupant of the Property shall use the rooftop facilities or balcony areas at any time
DRAFT .
19 15. All parking stalls on subterranean parking level P3 shall be reserved for use for parking for the residential portion of the Project. This parking area shall only be accessible to residents of the building and their authorized guests.

16. The Project shall operate at all times in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties or residents by reason of light, noise, activities, parking, or other actions.

17. The Project shall operate at all times in compliance with Municipal Code requirements for Noise Regulation.

18. The Applicant shall submit a Construction Traffic Management Plan to the Community Development Department for review and such Construction Traffic Management Plan shall be approved by the City’s Traffic Engineer prior to the earlier of the issuance of a demolition or the issuance of a building permit. The Construction Management Plan shall include, at a minimum the following:
a. Written information about the construction parking arrangements and hauling activities at different stages of demolition and construction to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Division of Public Works and the Building & Safety Department.
b. Information regarding the anticipated number of workers, the location of parking with respect to schedules of the demolition and construction period, the arrangements of deliveries, hauling activities, the length of time of operation, designation of construction staging area and other pertaining information regarding construction related traffic.

DRAFT
20 c. The proposed demolition construction staging for this Project to determine the amount, appropriate routes and time of day of heavy hauling truck traffic necessary for demolition, deliveries, etc., to the subject site.

19. The Applicant shall obtain the appropriate permits from the Community Development Department for the placement of construction canopies, fences, etc., for the construction of any improvements in the public right-of-way, and for use of the public right-of-way for staging and/or hauling certain equipment and materials related to the Project.

20. The Applicant shall post the names and telephone numbers of two construction representatives for the Project and a City contact on all construction fence signs. The phone numbers shall be manned at all times during construction hours.

21. The Applicant shall provide electric vehicle charging stations for the commercial and residential parking areas, including electric vehicle charging stations for required handicap accessible parking spaces, as required by all applicable California Green Building Code requirements.

22. In addition, to any electric vehicle charging stations required for the residential parking portion of the project on level P3, the applicant shall provide an additional 15% of the residential parking spaces with a standard 110-volt electrical outlet to facilitate the opportunity for Level 1 charging of electric vehicles.

Construction-Related Conditions

23. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, all applicable Park and Recreation Facilities Taxes req
DRAFT
uired by the Municipal Code shall be paid.
21 24. The Applicant shall remove and replace all public sidewalks adjacent to the Project site that are rendered defective as a result of Project construction, as determined by the City Engineer.

25. The Applicant shall remove and replace all curbs and gutters adjacent to the Project site that are rendered defective as a result of Project construction, as determined by the City Engineer.

26. The Applicant shall protect all existing street trees adjacent to the subject site during construction of the Project. Every effort shall be made to retain mature street trees. No street trees, including those street trees designated on the preliminary plans, shall be removed and/or relocated unless written approval from the Public Works Department and the City Engineer (or his/her designee) is first obtained.

27. Removal and/or replacement of any street trees shall not commence unless and until the Applicant has provided the City with an improvement security to ensure the establishment of any relocated or replaced street trees. The security amount will be determined by the Director of Public Works (or his/her designee), and shall be in a form approved by the Director of Community Development.

28. The Applicant shall remove and reconstruct any existing improvements in the public right-of-way damaged during construction operations performed under any permits issued by the City.

29. Condensation from HVAC and refrigeration equipment shall drain to the sanitary sewer, not curb drains.

30. The Applicant shall provide that all groundwater discharges to a storm drain. All ground water discharges must have a permit (NPDES) from the Regional Water DRAFT
22 Quality Control Board. Connection to a storm drain shall be accomplished in the manner approved by the City Engineer and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works.

31. The Applicant shall provide for all utility facilities, including electrical transformers required for service to the proposed structure(s), to be installed on the subject site. No such installations will be allowed in any City right-of-way.

32. The Applicant shall underground, if necessary, the utilities in adjacent streets per requirements of the Utility Company and the City.

33. The Applicant shall make connection to the City’s sanitary sewer system through the existing connections available to the subject site, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, and shall pay the applicable sewer connection fee. The costs of any upgrades necessary to provide the Project with utility connections shall be the responsibility of the applicant.

34. The Applicant shall make connection to the City’s water system through the existing water service connection unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The size, type, and location of the water service meter installation will also require approval from the City Engineer. The costs of any upgrades necessary to provide the Project with utility connections shall be the responsibility of the applicant.

35. Any streets surrounding the Project site that are damaged as a result of Project construction shall be repaved and restored to the street centerline.

36. All survey monuments, streetlights, and underground utilities, and any existing offsite improvements affected by the construction shall be re-established according to the City standards, and shall be paid for by the applicant. No privately DRAFT
-owned
23 structures or improvements are permitted within the public right-of-way without an encroachment permit.

Standard Conditions

37. APPEAL. Decisions of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council within fourteen (14) days of the Planning Commission action by filing a written appeal with the City Clerk. Appeal forms are available in the City Clerk’s office.

An appeal fee is required.

38. RECORDATION. This resolution approving this Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit shall not become effective until the owner of the Project site records a covenant, satisfactory in form and content to the City Attorney, accepting the conditions of approval set forth in this resolution. The covenant shall include a copy of this resolution as an exhibit. The Applicant shall deliver the executed covenant to the Department of Community Development within 180 days of the Planning Commission decision. At the time that the Applicant delivers the covenant to the City, the Applicant shall also provide the City with all fees necessary to record the document with the County Recorder. If the Applicant fails to deliver the executed covenant within the required 180 days, this resolution approving an amendment to the Planned Development shall be null and void and of no further effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Director of Community Development may, upon a written request by the Applicant, submitted prior to the expiration of the 180-day period, grant a written waiver from the 180-day time limit for a period of no more than 180 days if, at the time of the request, the Director determines that there have been no substantial changes to any federal, state or local law that would affect the Project. Regardless of the timelines set forth in this condition, in no event shall a building permit be issued prior to the recordation of the covenant.

DRAFT
24 39. EXPIRATION. Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit: The exercise of rights granted in such approvals shall be commenced within three (3) years after the date of approval of this resolution, as provided for in BHMC §10-3-207.A., unless otherwise extended.

40. VIOLATION OF CONDITIONS: A violation of any of these conditions of approval may result in enforcement action by the City until such violation is abated or the entitlement granted herein is revoked pursuant to Section 10-3-258 of the BHMC, or its successor regulation. All costs incurred by the City as a result of abatement of a violation on the property shall be reimbursed by the party in breach of this resolution.

41. APPROVAL RUNS WITH LAND. These conditions shall run with the land and shall remain in full force for the duration of the life of the Project. ///
///
///
///
///
///
DRAFT
25 Section 8. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall certify to the passage, approval, and adoption of this resolution, and shall cause this resolution and his/her Certification to be entered in the Book of Resolutions of the Planning Commission of the City.

Adopted: June 22, 2023
Myra Demeter, Ph.D.

Chair of the Planning Commission of the
City of Beverly Hills
Attest:

Masa Alkire, AICP
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Approved As To Form:

David M. Snow
Assistant City Attorney
Approved As To Content:

Masa Alkire, AICP
DRAFT
City Planner