Item F-2 Agenda Report — Beverly Hills City Council, October 3, 2023 (part 2 of 3)

Project construction would occur over approximately 24 months, beginning Fall 2023 and ending Fall 2025. Construction of the project would include the following phases: demolition the first six months, followed by 18 months of grading, building construction, and architectural coating. The proposed earthwork would result in approximately 13,800 cubic yards of export.

Overall, the proposed project would require City discretionary approval of a Development Plan Review (DPR) Amendment, Conditional Use Permit to allow fully automated parking at the site, a Zone Text Amendment to redefine “Alternative Parking Facility”, a Minor Accommodation Permit to allow a wall up to six feet in height abutting a residential side property line, and a Minor Accommodation Permit Amendment to allow improvement in the setback between nonresidential and residential sites.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 14 City of Beverly Hills
IV. CLASS 32 EXEMPTION CRITERIA ANALYSIS
CRITERION (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.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
Table 2, Beverly Hills General Plan Project Consistency Analysis, evaluates the project’s consistency with applicable City of Beverly Hills General Plan (General Plan) land use policies.

Table 2
Beverly Hills General Plan Project Consistency Analysis Applicable General Plan Land Use Policies Consistency Analysis LU 2.1 City Places: Neighborhoods, Districts, and
Corridors. Maintain and enhance the character, distribution, built form, scale, and aesthetic qualities of the City’s distinctive residential neighborhoods, business districts, corridors, and open spaces.

Consistent: The project is located on Wilshire Boulevard, a major arterial within Beverly Hills. Compared to the existing vacant commercial building, the proposed commercial building would enhance the visual character along Wilshire Boulevard. The proposed building would have similar architectural design as other luxury commercial buildings in the area, featuring large, floor-to-ceiling glass windows on the ground floor of the building and the penthouse level, and large glass windows on floors two and three with balconies overlooking Wilshire Boulevard. The color scheme for the proposed building would be black and dark grey. Overall, the proposed building design would be consistent with the visual character, form, scale, and aesthetics of other existing commercial buildings along Wilshire Boulevard and in the project area.

LU 2.4 Architectural and Site Design. Require that new
construction and renovation of existing buildings and
properties exhibit an elevated level of excellence in site planning, architectural design, building materials, use of sustainable design and construction practices, landscaping, and amenities that contribute to the City’s distinctive image and complement existing development.

Consistent: Refer to Policy LU 2.1 regarding the project’s proposed architectural design features and building materials. Proposed landscaping includes landscaping along the northern project boundary, including Pacific Wax myrtle (Myrica Californica). Overall, the proposed project would provide architectural design, site design, building materials, landscaping, and amenities that contribute to the City’s distinctive image and complement existing development.

LU 2.8 Pedestrian-Active Streets. Require that buildings in business districts be oriented to, and actively engage the street through design features such as build-to lines,
articulated and modulated façades, ground floor transparency such as large windows, and the limitation of parking entries directly on the street. Parking ingress and egress should be accessed from alleys where feasible.

Consistent: The proposed building would directly front existing pedestrian sidewalks along Wilshire Boulevard and North Carson Road with zero setbacks. The building would feature large, floor-to-ceiling glass windows on the ground floor of the building and the penthouse level, and large glass windows on floors two and three with balconies overlooking adjacent roadways. On-site parking would be provided underground and would be accessed via an ingress/egress driveway along North Carson Road away from Wilshire Boulevard. Overall, the proposed building and site design would promote pedestrian activity and engagement along Wilshire Boulevard.

LU 2.9 Public Safety. Require that development be located and designed to promote public safety by providing streetfronting uses, lighting, sightlines, and features that enhance community safety.

Consistent: Similar to existing adjacent commercial buildings, the proposed building would front pedestrian sidewalks along Wilshire Boulevard and North Carson Road so as to promote pedestrian activity. The project proposes large, floor-to-ceiling glass windows on the ground floor of the building and the penthouse level, and large glass windows on floors two and three with balconies overlooking the adjacent roadways. Proposed nighttime lighting includes, but is not limited to, internally illuminated building tenant signage.

LU 2.10 Development Transitions and Compatibility.

Require that sites and buildings be planned, located, and designed to assure functional and visual transitions between areas of differing uses and densities by addressing property Consistent: The proposed project would replace an existing vacant commercial building with a new commercial office building. Similar to existing adjacent commercial buildings, the proposed structure would directly front existing pedestrian sidewalks along Wilshire Boulevard and 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 15 City of Beverly Hills
Applicable General Plan Land Use Policies Consistency Analysis and height setbacks, window and entry placement, lighting, landscape buffers, and service access.

North Carson Road with zero setbacks and would feature large, floor-toceiling glass windows on the ground floor of the building and the penthouse level, and large glass windows on floors two and three with balconies overlooking adjacent roadways. The project includes a ten-foot wide setback with a six-foot wide ground level green space along the northern project boundary which would serve as a buffer between the proposed building and the adjacent single-family residence. The green space would feature a mix of tall bushes, which would partially screen the proposed development from the single-family residence. A van access area would be provided via an ingress/egress driveway along North Carson Road adjacent to the entry for the subterranean automated parking garage. Proposed nighttime lighting includes, but is not limited to, an internally illuminated building tenant signage. The proposed lighting contributes both to the buildings overall design as well as community safety. Overall, the proposed project is designed according to the established commercial corridor along Wilshire Boulevard as well as the provisions of the BHMC Article 19.5, Transition Between Commercial And Residential Uses, to assure functional and visual transitions between areas of differing uses.

LU 9.1 Uses for Diverse Customers. Accommodate retail,
office, entertainment, dining, hotel, and visitor-serving uses that support the needs of local residents, attract customers from the region, and provide a quality experience for national and international tourists.

Consistent: The proposed project would demolish a vacant commercial building and redevelop the site into a new, well-designed office building with a penthouse, and rooftop terrace, that would contribute towards the economic vitality and continued attraction of local, national, and international visitors to the City.

LU 9.2 Mitigation of Existing Commercial Residential
Conflicts. In those areas where conflicts already exist due to the abrupt change in character or spillover effects of
commercial uses onto adjacent residential areas, methods should be sought to mitigate existing problems through
appropriate mechanisms such as landscaping and screening, use of selected residential parcels to provide park buffers with the possibility of underground parking to serve the adjacent commercial areas, and the development of consolidated
parking facilities to serve commercial areas deficient in parking, or commercial areas which have no alley access to the rear and would require numerous curb cuts if parking were provided on individual parcels.

Consistent: The project proposes landscaping along the northern boundary of the project site which would serve as a buffer between the proposed building and the adjacent single-family residence. The green space would feature a mix of tall bushes, which would partially screen the project from the single-family residence. The project also includes two levels of underground parking access off of North Carson Road, which would minimize potential parking impacts on adjacent residential streets.

LU 11.2 Site Planning and Architectural Design. Require that commercial and office properties and buildings are planned and designed to exhibit a high level of site and architectural design quality and excellence.

Consistent: Refer to Policy LU 2.1.

LU 11.4 Parking in Pedestrian-Oriented Districts. Require that driveways be minimized in pedestrian-oriented
commercial districts to avoid interruptions in the continuity of the pedestrian shopping experience, prioritizing driveway locations to side streets and alleys wherever feasible.

Consistent: Refer to Policy LU 2.8.

LU 12.1 Functional and Operational Compatibility. Require that retail, office, entertainment, and other businesses abutting residential neighborhoods be managed to assure that
businesses do not create an unreasonable and detrimental impact on neighborhoods with respect to safety, privacy, noise, and quality of life by regulating hours of operation, truck deliveries, internal noise, staff parking and on-site loitering, trash storage and pick-up and other similar business activities.

Consistent: As discussed, the project includes landscaping along the northern project boundary which would serve as a buffer between the proposed building and the adjacent single-family residence. The green space would feature a mix of tall bushes, which would partially screen the proposed development from the single-family residence. The proposed office spaces would operate from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily. The proposed rooftop penthouse and balcony areas that are adjacent to residential uses would operate from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. daily. However, as detailed under BHMC Section 10-3-1956, Commercial-Residential Transition; General Operational Requirements, commercial operational hours are restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekends. Any operations outside of such hours would require an extended hours permit. A trash/recycling collection area is located on the western side of building, adjacent to the van loading area on the ground level. Refer to 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 16 City of Beverly Hills
Applicable General Plan Land Use Policies Consistency Analysis Criterion (d) B, Noise, below, for a discussion on the project’s potential impacts in regard to noise. Overall, the project would comply with all applicable regulations regarding hours of operation, van deliveries, noise, staff parking and on-site loitering, trash storage and pick-up, and other similar business activities.

LU 12.2 Building, Parking Structure, and Site Design.

Require that buildings, parking structures, and properties in commercial and office districts be designed to assure
compatibility with abutting residential neighborhoods,
incorporating such elements as setbacks, transitional building heights and bulk, architectural treatment of all elevations, landscape buffers, enclosure of storage facilities, air conditioning, and other utilities, walls and fences, and nonglare external lighting.

Consistent: As discussed, landscaping would be installed along the northern project boundary that would serve as a buffer between the proposed building and the adjacent single-family residence. The green space would feature a mix of tall bushes, which would partially screen the proposed development from the single-family residence. A total of one storage space is provided in the subterranean automated parking garage on basement floor two. Mechanical and air conditioning units would be located on the northeast portion of the rooftop penthouse level behind a wall, screened from public view. . Proposed nighttime lighting includes, but is not limited to, an internally illuminated building tenant signage. The proposed lighting contributes both to the buildings overall design as well as community safety. Overall, the proposed building is designed to limit the impacts of bulk and mass on abutting residential neighborhood.

LU 14.2 Site Development. Require that sites and buildings be planned and designed to meet applicable environmental sustainability objectives by: (a) facilitating pedestrian access between properties and access to public transit; (b) providing solar access; (c) assuring natural ventilation; (d) enabling capture and re-use of stormwater and graywater on-site while reducing discharge into the stormwater system; and (e) using techniques consistent with the City’s sustainability programs such as the City’s Green Building Ordinance.

Consistent: The project site is located in a high pedestrian activity area and would not adversely impact pedestrian access between properties or access to public transit. The proposed project is an infill development located within CARB-designated Central Business District. Commercial buildings are located adjacent to one another throughout the area. Public transportation service (Metro Rapid Bus Stop for bus lines 20/720 and a future Metro Purple Line Subway Stop) is provided along Wilshire Boulevard, with the nearest bus stop located 300 feet west of the project site at the Wilshire Boulevard and Willaman Drive intersection.

The proposed building would include large, clear glazed windows, operable windows, and terraces, which would allow natural lighting and ventilation into the building’s three levels. Natural ventilation would also be provided on the open rooftop penthouse.

The City also adopted the California Green Building Standards Code as Beverly Hills Municipal Code (BHMC) Section 9-1-1101, Adoption of the California Green Building Standards Code, which requires new buildings to implement sustainability techniques related to site development, indoor/outdoor water use, material conservation, etc. Further, as detailed in Table 15, Project Consistency with Applicable Goals and Policies of the Beverly Hills General Plan and Sustainable City Plan, the project would be consistent with the City’s Sustainable City Plan.

LU 14.4 New Construction of Private Buildings. Require
that new and substantially renovated buildings be designed and constructed in accordance with the City's sustainability programs such as the City's Green Building Ordinance or comparable criteria to reduce energy, water, and natural resource consumption, minimize construction wastes, use recycled materials, and avoid the use of toxics and hazardous materials.

Consistent: Refer to Policies LU 2.4 and LU 14.2.

LU 14.5 Heat Island Effect. Reduce "urban heat island" effect by requiring that new construction and substantial renovation of buildings use techniques to reduce the amount of heat that buildings, outdoor spaces, and parking lots absorb from sunlight.

Consistent: The project would provide a series of outdoor garden spaces for tenants on various floors. These garden spaces are intended to provide privacy for both the tenants and their adjacent residential neighbors. The ground level would have a vegetative screen between the project and its neighbor on the north side. There is also a proposed LID planter along the northeast edge to treat stormwater generated by the new project. The second level comprises a small outdoor patio space on the south. Where appropriate, raised planters are proposed to provide a soft barrier between the interior and exterior space and add visual interest to the outdoor space. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 17 City of Beverly Hills
Applicable General Plan Land Use Policies Consistency Analysis The third level is intended to be an overflow deck space of the interior conference room. Where appropriate, raised planters with a vegetative screen are proposed on the deck to create separation of spaces with the neighboring properties. Securing the privacy of residential neighbors, the height of the planting screen along the northern boundary would prohibit sightlines from within the garden spaces into adjacent properties. The roof level consists of an additional terrace space with more program elements.

The deck space would provide various types of seating areas. Similar to the lower levels, raised planters would be planted with vegetation that limits views of the residential properties to the north.

As discussed in Policy LU 2.1, the color scheme for the proposed building would be black and dark grey. The rooftop would partially include the floor of the penthouse. Since darker colors absorb light, rather than reflect light, this design would minimize the reflectivity of building materials. The proposed parking garage would be entirely underground and thus, would not generate a heat island effect. Proposed landscaping would be installed along the northern project boundary, including a mix of tall bushes and shrubs such as Tectorium Fructicans ‘Compactum’ (Compact Bush Germander) and Westringia Fruicosa Grey Box (Dwarf Coast Rosemary).

Overall, the proposed of greenery and color scheme would reduce the amount of heat absorbed or release to the surrounding area by the proposed project.

LU 14.8 Private Development Landscaping Material and
Irrigation. Require the use of landscaping materials and irrigation systems that minimize water use and runoff onto public streets and drainage systems.

Consistent: Refer to Policies LU 2.1, 2.4, 2.10, 12.1, 12.2, and LU 14.2.

LU 15.1 Economic Vitality and Business Revenue. Sustain a vigorous economy by supporting businesses that contribute revenue, quality services and high-paying jobs.

Consistent: Refer to Policy LU 9.1.

LU 15.2 Priority Businesses. Retain and build upon the key business sectors contributing to the City's identity, economy, and revenue for resident services, such as entertainmentrelated Class-A offices, high-end retail and fashion, restaurant, hotel, technology, and supporting uses.

Consistent: Refer to Policy LU 9.1.

LU 15.3 Revitalization of Vacant and Underutilized
Buildings. Promote the revitalization of distressed,
underutilized, and vacant buildings to sustain economic viability, activity, and provide income for City services.

Consistent: The proposed project is an infill development that would replace a vacant commercial building with a new, well-designed office building with a penthouse and rooftop terrace along Wilshire Boulevard, a major arterial within Beverly Hills.

Source: City of Beverly Hills, City of Beverly Hills General Plan, April 30, 2010.

MUNICIPAL CODE CONSISTENCY
Commercial-Residential Transition Area
The project site is located within a commercial-residential transition area, defined as a portion of a commercial zone that is located within 170 feet of a residential zone, pursuant to Article 19.5, Transition Between Commercial And Residential Uses, of the BHMC. Provisions within BHMC Article 19.5 include specific requirements related to setbacks, walls, landscaping, and general development and operational standards that aim to minimize potential impacts to residential uses in the vicinity, which are considered in the following analysis.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 18 City of Beverly Hills
Setbacks
BHMC Section 10-3-1952, Commercial Use Setbacks, applies to the project site given that it is located within a commercial-residential transition area. The setback requirements are only applicable to the northern property line, which is adjacent to an existing single-family residence. The eastern, southern, and western property lines do not have any setback requirements. As such, the proposed building would directly front existing pedestrian sidewalks along Wilshire Boulevard and North Carson Road.

For commercial developments without an alley between the residential and non-residential uses (e.g., the proposed project), BHMC Section 10-3-1952 requires a six-foot setback for portions of structures located less than eight feet below grade, a 10-foot setback for portions of structures up to 30 feet or two-stories in height, and a 20-foot setback for portions of structures more than 30 feet or two stories in height. As such, the proposed building would be constructed to the project boundary on all sides with the exception of the northern boundary of the project site, which has the following setbacks: a 10-foot setback on the ground level and level two and a 20-foot setback on level three. The proposed basement parking garage would have a six-foot setback from the property line, pursuant to BHMC Section 10-3-1952(B)(1).

Walls
Per BHMC Section 10-3-1953, Walls Required for Residential-Nonresidential Transition, nonresidential projects that abut a residential side property line are required to construct a solid masonry wall along the nonresidential property line. The project proposes a concrete masonry unit wall along the abutting residential property line ranging in height from three feet (for three linear feet) to six feet in height, as shown on Exhibit 3a, pursuant to the issuance of a Minor Accommodation as required per BHMC Section 10-3-1953 (C)(1). As such, the project would be consistent with BHMC Section 10-3-1953.

Landscaping
Pursuant to BHMC Section 10-3-1954, Landscaping of Setbacks for Commercial Uses, the project’s required setback area is required to be improved with landscaping in conformance with a plan that meets the following criteria and has been reviewed and approved by the City’s Architectural Commission: 1) Landscaping shall be of a type and density to provide a texture, buffer, or screen between nonresidential and residential zones as deemed appropriate for the location by the Architectural Commission; 2) Landscaping shall be of a type and size which will provide such texture, buffer, or screen to a reasonable extent when initially planted and which will grow to a size and configuration to achieve the full intent of such buffer within a reasonable amount of time; 3) Plants shall be of an appropriate type so as to minimize the dropping of leaves or needles onto adjacent properties or alleys or shall be capable of being readily maintained so as to minimize such dropping; and 4) Plants shall have a root structure which will not displace or damage paved areas and which will not interfere with nearby utility systems.

The project would provide a series of outdoor garden spaces for tenants on various floors. These garden spaces are intended to provide privacy for both the tenants and their adjacent residential 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 19 City of Beverly Hills
neighbors. The ground level would have a vegetative screen between the project and its neighbor on the north side. These trees (Pacific Wax myrtle) would grow to approximately 10-feet in height. There is also a proposed LID planter along the northeast edge to treat stormwater generated by the new project. The second level comprises a small outdoor patio space on the south. Where appropriate, raised planters are proposed to provide a soft barrier between the interior and exterior space and add visual interest to the outdoor space. The third level is intended to be an overflow deck space of the interior conference room. Where appropriate, raised planters with a vegetative screen are proposed on the deck to create separation of spaces with the neighboring properties. Securing the privacy of residential neighbors, the height of the planting screen along the northern boundary would prohibit sightlines from within the garden spaces into adjacent properties. The roof level consists of an additional terrace space with more program elements. The deck space would provide various types of seating areas. Similar to the lower levels, raised planters would be planted with vegetation that limits views of the residential properties to the north.

As described above, proposed landscaping includes a six-foot wide ground level green space along the northern project boundary that abuts the existing single-family residence, and includes Pacific Wax myrtle. These trees would grow to approximately 10-feet in height and would screen the proposed development from the residential uses to the north. Thus, the project would comply with BHMC Section 10-3-1954.

General Development and Operational Requirements
Per BHMC Section 10-3-1955, Commercial-Residential Transition; General Development Requirements, nonresidential projects located adjacent to residential zones are prohibited from having mechanical venting, mirrored or reflective glass, or loading docks facing the adjacent residential use. Additionally, the nonresidential project is required to allow for adequate sight lines for vehicular ingress/egress from each adjacent residential use. As shown on Exhibit 3e, rooftop mechanical units would be located on the northeast portion of the proposed building and would be enclosed by a metal panel wall. No mirrored or reflective glass is proposed on the building. Additionally, the proposed van loading area on the ground floor would be provided via North Carson Road, would not face existing residential uses to the north, and would be screened from the north via a concrete masonry wall). Sight lines for vehicular ingress/egress for the residences to the north would not be impacted given that the proposed wall height along the northern property line at this location would not exceed 18 inches in height.

Therefore, the project would comply with BHMC Section 10-3-1955.

BHMC Section 10-3-1956, Commercial-Residential Transition; General Operational Requirements, details operational requirements during extended hours (defined as hours outside of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekends). The proposed office spaces are anticipated to operate from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily. The proposed rooftop penthouse and balcony areas that are adjacent to residential uses would operate from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. daily. However, as detailed in BHMC Section 10-3-1956(B), the proposed office uses are generally exempt from the extended hours permit requirements given they are generally professional/semi-professional uses. Thus, the project would comply with the operational requirements detailed under BHMC Section 10-3-1956, and would not require an extended hours permit. Any future retail and/or restaurant use that proposed 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 20 City of Beverly Hills
to operate during extended hours would require the approval of an Extended Hours Permit, subject to review by the Planning Commission.

Permitted Uses
The General Plan Land Use Map designates the project site as Low Density General Commercial and the Beverly Hills Zoning Map zones the project site as Commercial (C-3) with a Mixed Use Overlay.

Pursuant to BHMC Section 10-3-1601, Uses Permitted, the C-3 zone permits commercial uses, including, but not limited to, cafes, carpenter shop, theater, conservatory, dancing academy, exercise club, library, office, parking garage, shops/stores, studios, etc. Therefore, the proposed commercial building is a permitted use in accordance with the C-3 zoning.

Floor Area Ratio
The C-3 zoning allows a maximum 2.0 FAR. The project site is approximately 12,783 square feet and the proposed building is approximately 25,566 net square feet, which equates to an approximately 2.0 FAR. Thus, the project would be consistent with the allowed FAR.

Building Height
According to BHMC Section 10-3-2726, the maximum building height for C-3 zones is 45 feet.

However, under BHMC Section 10-3-3107(A)(1)(b), rooftop uses in C-3 zones are permitted to exceed the maximum building height by an additional 15 feet for a total maximum height of 60 feet.

Thus, the proposed 60-foot building, inclusive of rooftop uses and elevator enclosure, would be consistent with the allowed building height under BHMC Sections 10-3-2726 and 10-3-3107(A)(1).

Parking Requirements
Based on BHMC Section 10-3-2730, the proposed commercial use is required to provide one parking space per 350 square feet of commercial uses. Therefore, the 25,566-net square foot building is required to provide 74 parking spaces. The project currently proposes 76 fully automated parking spaces in a two-level subterranean parking garage (two additional spaces than required).

Rooftop Uses
Per BHMC Section 10-3-3107(A)(1)(c), the total floor area of the rooftop use shall not exceed the maximum allowable floor area otherwise applicable to the development by more than: 1) 3,500 square feet; 2) 50 percent of the total area of the story immediately below the rooftop use; or 3) ten percent of the total floor area of the development, whichever is less. Further, per BHMC Section 10-3- 3107(A)(1)(d), the total floor area of any unenclosed terraces that are ancillary to a rooftop use, or unenclosed architectural features shall not exceed 50 percent of the total area of the story immediately below the rooftop use.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 21 City of Beverly Hills
As shown on Table 3, Rooftop Uses Floor Area Consistency Analysis, the proposed penthouse is approximately 2,531 net square feet, and the unenclosed rooftop/terrace is approximately 5,649 net square feet, both of which would comply with BHMC Section 10-3-3107(A)(1)(c) and (d).

Table 3
Rooftop Uses Floor Area Consistency Analysis
Allowable Floor Area (square
Feet)
Proposed Floor Area (square
Feet)
Penthouse Roof Structure 2,5571 2,531
Unenclosed Rooftop Area 5,7392 5,649
Note:

1. Calculated based on 10 percent of total floor area of the development (25,566 net square feet) pursuant to BHMC Section 10-3-3107(A)(1)(c).

2. Calculated based on 50 percent of the total gross area of the story immediately below the rooftop use (i.e., third floor; 11,478 gross square feet) pursuant to BHMC Section 10-3-3107(A)(1)(c).

As analyzed, the project would be consistent with applicable General Plan policies and BHMC requirements. Thus, the project would meet Criterion (a) requirements.

CRITERION (b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.

The project site is approximately 0.29 acres, or 12,783 square feet, and is located at 8633 Wilshire Boulevard. The site is located at the northeast corner of the Wilshire Boulevard and North Carson Road intersection and is surrounded by commercial and residential development on all sides within a built out and urbanized area of Beverly Hills. As such, the project would meet Criterion (b) requirements.

CRITERION (c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.

As stated, the project site is in an urbanized area of Beverly Hills and is surrounded by commercial and residential uses. The site is currently developed with an existing commercial building and associated surface parking areas with minimal ornamental landscaping along the project perimeters.

No vegetation exists within the project site or surrounding areas that could provide habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. Thus, the proposed project would meet Criterion (c) requirements.

CRITERION (d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.

A. TRAFFIC
The following analysis is based on the 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis Beverly Hills (Trip Generation/Parking Analysis), prepared by Coco Traffic Planners, Inc., dated July 31, 2023; refer to Appendix A, Trip Generation Analysis/Parking Analysis.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 22 City of Beverly Hills
It should be noted that per the City’s adopted Local Transportation Assessment Guidelines, the trip generation analysis assumed the former on-site restaurant, which was recently vacated, to be operational; thus, trip discounts (trip credit and pass-by credit) were applied to calculate net trip generation.

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, the City adopted the City of Beverly Hills California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Transportation Thresholds of Significance (CEQA Transportation Thresholds) in October 2019. The adopted thresholds analyze a project’s potential to result in significant transportation impacts utilizing a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) methodology. Certain projects may be screened out of VMT analysis based on the following criteria reproduced from the City’s CEQA Transportation Thresholds Table 2, VMT Screening Options for Land Use Projects:
• Project Type Screening: Local serving retail projects (defined as less than 50,000 square feet in size) and projects that generate less than 110 average daily trips. • Low VMT Area Screening: Residential projects located in low VMT-generating traffic analysis zones (TAZs). These TAZs generate total daily VMT per capita that is 15 percent less than the baseline level for the region.
• Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening: Projects located in the commercial zone of TPAs (defined as within 0.5-mile of a Metro Rapid bus stop) and does not have the following characteristics:
o FAR less than 0.75;
o More parking than required by City, unless additional parking is being provided for design feasibility, such as completing the floor of a subterranean or structured parking facility, or if additional parking is located within the project site to serve adjacent uses; or
o Inconsistent with the applicable Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy.

To determine whether the project could be screened out of VMT analysis, the project’s trip forecasts were derived from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, generation factor for General Office (Land Use Code 710). Trip generation factors are primarily based on trips generated in a one-hour period during the morning peak period (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) and the evening peak period (4:00 p.m. to 6 p.m.), as well as the Average Daily Traffic (ADT).

The former restaurant’s traffic generation was evaluated based on the assumptions of relatively low reduction factors. Specifically, a five percent factor was used for transit credit, and a ten 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 23 City of Beverly Hills
percent factor was used for pass-by trips. Based on the ITE data, the existing development (former restaurant) would generate approximately 484 ADT with five a.m. peak hour trips and 43 p.m. peak hour trips; refer to Table 4, Project Traffic Generation.

Table 4
Project Trip Generation
Land Use Size1
Land
Use
Code
Average Daily
Traffic AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Trip Ends2 TE Rate Trip Ends TE Rate Trip Ends
Rate3 TE In Out In Out In Out In Out
Existing Development
Restaurant 6.87 931 83.85 569 0.599 0.131 4 1 5.226 2.574 35 17 Existing Development Traffic Generation 569 AM Peak = 5 4 1 PM Peak = 52 35 17 Transit Credit
(5%) 6.787
850

4.10 28 2.831 1.810 0 0 2.831 1.810 2 1
Pass-by Credit
(10%) 6.787 8.40 57 2.831 1.810 0 0 2.831 1.810 4 2
Traffic Generation Volumes Credit 85 AM Peak = 0 0 0 PM Peak = 9 6 3 Existing Development Net Traffic Generation 484 AM Peak = 5 4 1 PM Peak = 43 29 14 Proposed Project
General Office 25.566 710 11.00 281 1.72 0.28 44 7 0.71 3.47 5 26 Proposed Project Trip Generation 281 AM Peak = 51 44 7 PM Peak = 31 5 26 Total Future Net Traffic Addition (203) AM Peak = 46 40 6 PM Peak = (12) (24) 12 Note: Trip generation factors per Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. 1) “Size” is in thousand square feet.
2) Trip End (TE) is a one-way vehicle movement entering or leaving the traffic generator. 3) TE Rate is the average number of Trip Ends generated per unit of “Size”.

Source: Coco Traffic Planners, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis, July 31, 2023; refer to Appendix A.

Based on the ITE data, the proposed project would generate approximately 281 ADT with 51 a.m. peak hour trips and 31 p.m. peak hour trips; refer to Table 4. The estimated project-generated traffic volumes do not include any trip reduction from the former restaurant.

In order to correctly estimate the net quantity of traffic the proposed development would add to the surrounding street system, the traffic generated by the existing development (former restaurant) is subtracted from the project-generated traffic volumes. As shown in Table 4, the proposed project is expected to reduce traffic volumes by approximately 203 ADT after taking into account existing traffic volumes from the former restaurant use. Overall, the proposed project would result in a net reduction of 203 ADT with 46 additional a.m. peak hour trips and 12 fewer p.m. peak hour trips.

Based on the City’s CEQA Transportation Thresholds, the proposed project qualifies for an exemption from VMT analysis. The applicable screening criteria exempts the project because the project a) would add less than 110 vehicle trips to the surrounding street system. • Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of more than 0.75 (the project proposes 2.0; refer to Criterion a);
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 24 City of Beverly Hills
• Includes the required amount of parking for use by employees (74 spaces required; 76 spaces proposed, which is required for design feasibility of completing the floor of the fully automated subterranean parking structure); and
• Is consistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (refer to Criterion d (C), Air Quality).

Metro Rapid bus stops for bus lines 20/720 are located along Wilshire Boulevard, with the nearest bus stop approximately 300 feet west of the project site at the Wilshire Boulevard and Willaman Drive intersection. The project site is also situated approximately 2.74 miles north of the La Cienega/Jefferson Metro train station. The Metro Purple Line subway system, currently under construction, is proposed to run under Wilshire Boulevard in the project vicinity. Consequently, the project is also screened out of the City’s local traffic assessment as the project’s net peak hour trips would be less than 50 trips.

PARKING SUPPLY AND DEMAND
Refer to Criterion (a) above. The project would provide 76 spaces in the two-level subterranean automated parking garage. Based on BHMC Section 10-3-2730, the proposed 25,566-net square foot building is required to provide 74 parking spaces (one parking space per 350 square feet of commercial uses). As such, the proposed project would provide two additional parking spaces beyond what is required and project implementation would not significantly impact parking supply and demand within the project vicinity.

The project includes a proposed Zone Text Amendment to redefine “Alternative Parking Facility”. The proposed parking system would consist of two vertical reciprocating conveyors that would transport vehicles from the ground floor and into the subterranean automated parking levels. According to BHMC Section 10-3-2730.4, an "alternative parking facility" may be used to meet the parking requirements of Section 10-3-2730 provided that the alternative parking facility and the use(s) for which it provides required parking do not include medical uses, are located in a commercial zone on property with a site area not exceeding 16,000 square feet, and subject to the remaining provisions in BHMC Section 10-3-2730.4. Therefore, upon approval of the proposed Zone Text Amendment, the project would comply with these regulations and would meet the City’s parking requirement.

SITE ACCESS

Refer to Criterion (a) above. Pedestrian access to the building would be provided via a main entrance along Wilshire Boulevard. Vehicular access to the subterranean automated parking garage would be provided via an ingress/egress driveway along North Carson Road. All ingress/egress points would be subject to the City’s site access requirements identified in BHMC Title 8, Chapter 4, Parkways, Streets, Sidewalks, and Driveways. Pursuant to BHMC Title 8, Chapter 4, the project would be subject to City specifications for site access and would require a permit issued by the 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 25 City of Beverly Hills
City’s transportation/engineering official. Following conformance with BHMC Chapter 4, impacts regarding site access would be less than significant.

CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC
Construction traffic impacts on roadway facilities would be significant if the construction of a project creates a prolonged impact due to lane closure, limitations on emergency vehicle access, traffic hazards to bicycles and/or pedestrians, truck traffic on roadways not assigned as truck routes, and other similar impediments to circulation. The project would not result in significant construction traffic effects, based on the following proposed construction schedule and activities and City requirements:
• Construction activities would be temporary in nature, demolition activities occurring over six months and grading/construction occurring over the following 18 months.

Construction activities would primarily occur on-site with partial lane closures, if necessary, occurring on streets directly adjacent to the project site. All anticipated lane closures and construction activities would occur between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., unless otherwise authorized as part of an after-hours construction permit. As a standard requirement for building permits per BHMC Section 9-1-109[C], Permit Issuance, the project would also be required to implement a construction management plan (CMP). As part of the CMP, any lane closures would require a traffic control plan to minimize construction conflicts with access/circulation and would also set forth construction inspection milestones to ensure the timely completion of all construction activities. Further, a Class A Permit is required to allow the use of public property in conjunction with construction activity occurring on abutting private premises, including the standing or parking of trucks or equipment, loading and unloading materials, and other related construction activities which impose a minor and temporary burden on public property per BHMC Section 8-2- 3, Types of Permits. Thus, with approval of the CMP and issuance of a Class A Permit, the project’s temporary construction-related traffic would not significantly impair the flow of traffic on adjacent roadways.
• Construction-related trips ranging from about three to 15 worker trips during all construction phases, 5 vendor trips during building construction, and 50 haul trips during grading would be generated during project construction. As such, the project would generate less construction trips than operational trips; refer to Table 4. As concluded above, the project’s operational traffic impacts would be less than significant; thus, construction-related traffic would similarly result in less than significant impacts to roadway intersections. Further, as stated below, a standard condition of approval required by the City’s Transportation Department would restrict construction-related trips to occur outside of peak hours.
• As detailed in BHMC Section 7-2-203, Streets Designated for Heavy Vehicle Usage, the City has designated truck routes within Beverly Hills, which include Wilshire Boulevard, Beverly 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 26 City of Beverly Hills
Drive (from the south city limits to Santa Monica Boulevard [north]), and North Santa Monica Boulevard. However, per BHMC 7-2-202, Emergency Or Necessary Use Of Restricted Street, vehicles may use a street other than those designated in BHMC Section 7-2-203 for the purpose of delivering materials to be used in the repair, alteration, remodeling, or construction of any building or structure for which a building permit has been previously obtained. This would allow the use of streets that are expressly allowed for heavy truck hauling as well as streets that are not expressly allowed. The project would comply with the designated truck routes as illustrated on General Plan Map CIR3, Truck Routes, as well as the regulations set forth in the BHMC Section 7-2-203. • Per BHMC Section 5-1-205, Restrictions on Construction Activity, construction work is only allowed to occur between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and would likely be staggered throughout the day. Weekend construction activities are prohibited given that the project site is located within 500 feet of a residential zone, unless an after-hours construction permit is issued pursuant to BHMC Section 5-1-205(C). A standard condition of approval required by the City’s Transportation Department would also restrict construction-related trips to occur outside of peak hours.

Based on the limited number of construction-related trips and the temporary duration of project construction, project implementation would not significantly contribute to local traffic during construction upon compliance with the applicable regulations as outline above. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

B. NOISE
The following analysis is based on the 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Noise Technical Memorandum (Noise Memorandum), prepared by Michael Baker International, dated March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix B, Noise Memorandum.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Sound, Noise, and Groundborne Vibration
Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium such as air, and is characterized by both its amplitude and frequency (or pitch). The human ear does not hear all frequencies equally. In particular, the ear deemphasizes low and very high frequencies. To better approximate the sensitivity of human hearing, the A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) has been developed. Decibels are based on the logarithmic scale. The logarithmic scale compresses the wide range in sound pressure levels to a more usable range of numbers in a manner similar to the Richter scale used to measure earthquakes. In terms of human response to noise, a sound ten dBA higher than another is perceived to be twice as loud and 20 dBA higher is perceived to be four times as loud, and so forth. Everyday sounds normally range from 30 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 27 City of Beverly Hills
(very loud). On this scale, the human range of hearing extends from approximately three dBA to around 140 dBA.

Noise is generally defined as unwanted or excessive sound, which can vary in intensity by over one million times within the range of human hearing; therefore, a logarithmic scale, known as the decibel scale (dB), is used to quantify sound intensity. Noise can be generated by a number of sources, including mobile sources such as automobiles, trucks, and airplanes, and stationary sources such as construction sites, machinery, and industrial operations. Noise generated by mobile sources typically attenuates (is reduced) at a rate between three dBA and 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. The rate depends on the ground surface and the number or type of objects between the noise source and the receiver. Hard and flat surfaces, such as concrete or asphalt, have an attenuation rate of three dBA per doubling of distance. Soft surfaces, such as uneven or vegetated terrain, have an attenuation rate of about 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise generated by stationary sources typically attenuates at a rate between six dBA and about 7.5 dBA per doubling of distance.

Sources of earth-borne vibrations include natural phenomena (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides, etc.) or man-made causes (explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction equipment, etc.). Vibration sources may be continuous (e.g., factory machinery) or transient (e.g., explosions). Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves with an average motion of zero. Several different methods are typically used to quantify vibration amplitude. One is the peak particle velocity (PPV); another is the root mean square (RMS) velocity. The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave. The RMS velocity is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the signal. The PPV and RMS vibration velocity amplitudes are used to evaluate human response to vibration.

Noise Sensitive Receptors
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses where noise exposure could result in health-related risks to individuals, as well as places where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels. Additional land uses such as parks, historic sites, cemeteries, and recreation areas are considered sensitive to increases in exterior noise levels. Schools, churches, hotels, libraries, and other places where low interior noise levels are essential are also considered noise-sensitive land uses. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a single-family residence located approximately 12 feet to the north of the project site. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 28 City of Beverly Hills
Existing Stationary Noise Levels
The primary sources of stationary noise in the project vicinity are urban-related activities (i.e., mechanical equipment, parking areas, and pedestrians). The noise associated with these sources may represent a single-event noise occurrence, short-term, or long-term/continuous noise.

Existing Ambient Noise Levels
On March 19, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom passed Executive Order N-33-20 in response to the growing spread of COVID-19. Executive Order N-33-30 requires that all individuals living in California shall stay at home or at their place of residence, except as needed to maintain continuity of the operations of the Federal critical infrastructure. As such, on-site noise measurements while Executive Order N-33-20 is active would not correctly reflect the ambient noise level near the project site. Thus, in order to assess the ambient noise levels, the existing ambient noise levels from mobile sources were modeled using the Federal Highway Administration’s Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108).

Table 5
Existing Ambient Noise Level
Roadway Segment ADT
dBA CNEL @ 100
Feet from Roadway
Centerline
Distance from Roadway Centerline to: (Feet)
70 CNEL Noise
Contour
65 CNEL Noise
Contour
60 CNEL
Noise
Contour
Wilshire Boulevard Between Robertson
Boulevard and La Cienega Boulevard 39,626 62.8 - 71 153 ADT = average daily traffic; dBA = A-weighted decibels; CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level; - = contour is located within roadway right-of-way Notes:

1. ADT was collected in 2019. A 3 percent annual growth rate was applied to the ADT value.

Source: Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Noise Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix B.

As shown in Table 5, existing ambient noise level from mobile sources in the vicinity of the site is approximately 62.8 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from roadway centerline. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 29 City of Beverly Hills

NOISE IMPACTS
Short-Term Construction Noise Impacts
Temporary increases in ambient noise levels as a result of the project would predominantly be associated with construction activities. Construction activities would occur over approximately 24 months and would include the following phases: demolition, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Project construction would require concrete/industrial saws, crawler tractors, excavators, off-highway trucks, and skid steer loaders during demolition; concrete/industrial saws, excavators, and skid steer loaders during grading; concrete/industrial saws, cranes, and signal boards during building construction; rollers and tractors/loaders/backhoes during paving, and air compressors during architectural coatings.

Typical noise levels generated by construction equipment are shown in Table 6, Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Construction Equipment.

Table 6
Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Construction Equipment Type of Equipment Acoustical Use Factor1 Lmax at 50 Feet (dBA) Lmax at 12 Feet (dBA) Concrete Saw 20 90 102
Crane 16 81 91
Concrete Mixer Truck 40 79 91
Excavator 40 79 93
General Industrial Equipment 50 85 97
Loader 40 78 91
Tractor 40 84 96
Water Truck 40 80 92
Note:

1. Acoustical Use Factor (percent): Estimates the fraction of time each piece of construction equipment is operating at full power (i.e., its loudest condition) during a construction operation.

Source: Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Noise Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix B.

As shown in Table 6, construction-generated noise levels would range from 91 dBA Lmax to 102 dBA Lmax at the nearest sensitive receptor approximately 12 feet from the project boundary. It should be noted that the noise levels identified in Table 6 are maximum sound levels (Lmax), which are the highest individual sound occurring at an individual time period. Operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be due to random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). Noise generated from construction activities would only occur during the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and would not occur on a Saturday, Sunday, or public holiday, in compliance with BHMC Section 5-1-205, Restrictions On Construction Activity, and would be exempt from the City’s noise standards.

These permitted hours of construction are required in recognition that construction activities undertaken during daytime hours are a typical part of living in an urban environment and do not 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 30 City of Beverly Hills
cause a significant disruption. Thus, a less than significant noise impact would result from construction activities.

Long-Term Operational Noise Impacts
Off-Site Mobile Noise
The proposed project would result in some additional traffic on adjacent roadways, thereby potentially increasing vehicular noise in the vicinity of existing and proposed land uses. The most prominent source of mobile traffic noise in the project vicinity is along Wilshire Boulevard. As shown in Table 5, the project site is located partially within the 65 dBA CNEL roadway noise contour zone along Wilshire Boulevard and the rest of the site is located within the 60 dBA CNEL roadway noise contour zone.

According to the Trip Generation/Parking Analysis, the proposed project would generate a maximum of 281 daily trips, including 51 a.m. peak hour trips and 31 p.m. peak hour trips. It is acknowledged that although the traffic analysis presented above considers a net change in daily trips due to the previous operation of the restaurant on-site (per City’s adopted Local Transportation Assessment Guidelines), this analysis considers the project’s daily trips without discounting the previous on-site operation (as the project site is currently vacant). The proposed project would result in a net decrease in traffic generation as the existing development generates 484 average daily trips, resulting in a net decrease of 203 daily trips. As shown in Table 5, the current ADT on Wilshire Boulevard is 39,626. As such, the proposed project would decrease the daily trips in the project vicinity by 0.5 percent. The ADT generated by the proposed project would represent a nominal percent increase in daily traffic compared to existing traffic conditions on the surrounding roadways. According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), a doubling of traffic (100 percent increase) on a roadway would result in a perceptible increase in traffic noise levels (three dBA). As such, the project’s 0.5-percent decrease in traffic volume along surrounding roadways would be nominal and would not result in a perceptible increase in traffic noise levels (i.e., less than 100 percent). Thus, a less than significant impact would occur in this regard.

Stationary Noise
Stationary noise sources associated with the project would include the operation of mechanical equipment, parking lot activities, and outdoor gathering areas.

Mechanical Equipment Noise
Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) units would be installed on the penthouse floor of the proposed building. Typically, mechanical equipment noise is 55 dBA at 50 feet from the source. Based upon the Inverse Square Law, sound levels decrease by six dBA for each doubling of distance from the source. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a singlefamily residence located approximately 12 feet to the north of the project site. As shown on Exhibit 3d, the penthouse floor HVAC units would be located approximately 20 feet from the 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 31 City of Beverly Hills
northern boundary of the project site. The project proposes HVAC units on the northeast side of the rooftop penthouse level (43 feet in height). As such, the HVAC units would be approximately 50 feet from the nearest sensitive receptor and the noise level would be reduced to approximately 55 dBA without an enclosure or noise attenuation features, which would not exceed the City’s 60 dBA CNEL exterior noise compatibility standard for single-family residences. In addition, the HVAC units would be shielded by a 13-foot, 6-inch high wall, which would further attenuate operational noise from the HVAC units. Therefore, the proposed HVAC units would not generate noise levels in excess of 5 dBA over existing ambient noise level (62.8 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from Wilshire Boulevard roadway centerline as shown in Table 5) in the project vicinity in compliance with the City’s Noise Ordinance (BHMC Section 5-1-202, Machinery, Equipment, Fans, and Air Conditioning). An emergency generator would be installed. The generator would be enclosed in a room located on the southeast section of the proposed building, and therefore would not be audible to off-site sensitive receptors. In addition, the generator would only be used during emergencies, in which case would be exempt from the City’s noise standards. Thus, the proposed project would not result in noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors from HVAC units, and stationary noise levels from the proposed HVAC units would comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Parking Lot Noise
The proposed project would include two levels of basement parking with 76 parking spaces.

Access to the basement parking would be provided via a vehicular ingress/egress driveway to the west of the proposed building along North Carson Road, as shown on Exhibit 3a. Estimates of the maximum noise levels associated with parking lot activities are shown in Table 7, Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Parking Lots.

Table 7
Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Parking Lots
Noise Source Maximum Noise Levels
at 50 Feet from Source
Car door slamming 61 dBA Leq
Car starting 60 dBA Leq
Car idling 53 dBA Leq
Source: Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Noise Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix B.

As shown in Table 7, parking lot activities can result in noise levels up to 61 dBA at a distance of 50 feet. It is noted that parking lot noise are instantaneous noise levels compared to noise standards in the CNEL scale, which are averaged over time. As a result, actual noise levels over time resulting from parking lot activities would be lower than what is identified in Table 7. The proposed automated system would require vehicles to be parked in designated parking bays on the ground level. The parked vehicles would be transported via vertical reciprocating conveyors into the two basement parking levels. From there, the fully automated guided vehicles system would guide the parked vehicles into the designated parking spots. Cars awaiting to park in the 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 32 City of Beverly Hills
ground level parking bays would potentially idle and generate noise level of 53 dBA Leq at 50 feet as identified in Table 7. The parking bay would be located as close as 18 feet to the nearest sensitive receptors. The potential noise level to the nearest sensitive receptors would be 62 dBA. However, the parking bay would be located within the proposed building and a concrete masonry unit wall is proposed along the northern project boundary. The wall of the proposed building and proposed concrete wall would block the line-of-sight between the sensitive receptors and the noise source (i.e., car door slamming, engine of the vehicle idling on the access driveway). The proposed concrete wall would reduce the noise level associated level to at least 57 dBA.4 As a result, the noise level would be would not exceed the City’s 60 dBA CNEL exterior noise compatibility standard for single-family residences. It should also be noted that a parking driveway for accessing the subterranean automated parking system has been proposed at the northwest corner of the project site. Moderate vehicular traffic would be present at this location. Nonetheless, similar to parking lot noises, noise from usage of the access parking driveway would be partially masked by background noise from traffic. Therefore, parking garage noise associated with the project is not expected to exceed the City’s noise standards and would not introduce a new noise source compared to existing conditions. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

Outdoor Gathering Area Noise
As noted above, the project would include a balcony on the third floor adjacent to the abutting single-family residence, rooftop penthouse lunchroom, and an outdoor rooftop terrace with canopy covered areas. These areas have the potential to be accessed by groups of employees intermittently for various occasions. Noise generated by groups of people (i.e., crowds) is dependent on several factors including vocal effort, impulsiveness, and the random orientation of the crowd members. Crowd noise is estimated at 60 dBA at one meter (3.28 feet) away for raised normal speaking. This noise level would have a +5 dBA adjustment for the impulsiveness of the noise source, and a -3 dBA adjustment for the random orientation of the crowd members.

Therefore, crowd noise would be approximately 62 dBA at one meter from the source (i.e., at the gathering plaza).

As shown in Exhibits 3d, Floor Plan – Penthouse and Exhibits 3e, Floor Plan – Roof, the rooftop penthouse and outdoor terrace would be approximately 20 linear feet from the nearest sensitive receptor located to the north of the project site. Based on the Inverse Square Law, crowd noise would be reduced to approximately 46 dBA from the penthouse and terrace at the closest sensitive receptor, which would not exceed the City’s 60 dBA CNEL exterior noise compatibility standard for single-family residences. As such, the proposed outdoor terrace area would not generate noise levels that would exceed the City’s noise standards at the closest sensitive receptors. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

4 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide, January 2006. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 33 City of Beverly Hills

GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION IMPACTS
Project construction can generate varying degrees of groundborne vibration, depending on the construction procedure and the construction equipment used. Operation of some heavy-duty construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in amplitude with distance from the source. The effect on buildings located in the vicinity of the construction site often varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and construction characteristics of the receiver building(s). The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibration at moderate levels, to slight damage at the highest levels. Groundborne vibrations from construction activities rarely reach levels that damage structures.

Table 8
Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment
Equipment Approximate peak particle velocity at 25 feet (inches/second)1
Approximate peak particle velocity at 12 feet
(inches/second)1
Loaded trucks 0.076 0.170
Small bulldozer 0.003 0.007
Jackhammer 0.035 0.079
Notes:

1. Calculated using the following formula:

PPV equip = PPVref x (25/D)1.1
where: PPV (equip) = the peak particle velocity in inch per second (in/sec) of the equipment adjusted for the distance PPV (ref) = the reference vibration level in in/sec from Table 7-4 of the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.

D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver
Source: Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Noise Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix B.

Ground-borne vibration decreases rapidly with distance. As indicated in Table 8, based on the FTA data, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment operations range from

0.003 to 0.076 in/sec PPV at 25 feet and 0.007 to 0.170 in/sec PPV at 12 feet from the source of activity. The nearest commercial/industrial structure is a commercial building adjoining the project site to the east and the nearest residential structure is a single-family residence located 12 feet to the north. However, the project would not require pile driving activities and would not utilize heavy-duty construction equipment with noticeable vibration levels (e.g., vibratory rollers, large 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 34 City of Beverly Hills
bulldozers, jackhammers, and pile drivers) near off-site uses or nearby structures. Furthermore, hauling trucks routes would be directed away from the project’s northern and eastern boundaries where off-site sensitive uses and structures are located. Therefore, construction activities would not be capable of exceeding the 0.3 in/sec PPV or 0.2 in/sec PPV significance threshold for vibration and a less than significant impact would occur in this regard.

AIRPORT NOISE IMPACTS
The nearest public use airport to the project site is the Santa Monica Municipal Airport which lies approximately five miles to the southwest of the project site. This airport is open to the public and is owned and operated by the City of Santa Monica. According to Exhibit 3-4, Year 2021 CNEL Contours Santa Monica Airport, of the City’s Calendar Year 2021 CNEL Contours Santa Monica Municipal Airport the project site is not located within the Santa Monica Municipal Airport CNEL contours.5
In addition, the project site is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, no impact related to airport land use compatibility would occur.

C. AIR QUALITY
The following analysis is based on the 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Air Quality Technical Memorandum (Air Quality Memorandum), prepared by Michael Baker International on March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix C, Air Quality Memorandum.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Thresholds Under CEQA, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is an expert commenting agency on air quality within its jurisdiction or impacting its jurisdiction. Under the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), the SCAQMD has adopted Federal attainment plans for ozone (O3) and particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less (PM10). The SCAQMD reviews projects to ensure that they would not: (1) cause or contribute to any new violation of any air quality standard; (2) increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation of any air quality standard; or (3) delay timely attainment of any air quality standard or any required interim emission reductions or other milestones of any Federal attainment plan.

The CEQA Air Quality Handbook also provides significance thresholds for both construction and operation of projects within the SCAQMD jurisdictional boundaries. If the SCAQMD thresholds are exceeded, a potentially significant impact could result. However, ultimately the lead agency determines the thresholds of significance for impacts. If a project proposes development in excess 5 Santa Monica Municipal Airport, 2021 CNEL Noise Contours, https://www.santamonica.gov/media/Public%20Works/Airport/noise%20reports/2021_CNEL_annual_report.pdf, , May 2022. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 35 City of Beverly Hills
of the established thresholds, as outlined in Table 9, South Coast Air Quality Management District Emissions Thresholds, a significant air quality impact may occur, and additional analysis is warranted to fully assess the significance of impacts.

Table 9
South Coast Air Quality Management District Emissions Thresholds Phase
Pollutant (pounds/day)
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Construction 75 100 550 150 150 55
Operational 55 55 550 150 150 55
ROG = reactive organic gases; NOX = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; SOX = sulfur oxides; PM10 = particulate matter up to 10 microns; PM2.5 = particulate matter up to 2.5 microns
Source: Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Air Quality Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix C.

Localized Significance Thresholds
Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards’ Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). The SCAQMD provided the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated July 2008) for guidance. The LST methodology assists lead agencies in analyzing localized impacts associated with project-specific level proposed projects. The SCAQMD provides the LST lookup tables for one-, two-, and five-acre projects emitting carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX), PM10, or particulate matter up to 2.5 microns (PM2.5). The LST methodology and associated mass rates are not designed to evaluate localized impacts from mobile sources traveling over the roadways. The SCAQMD recommends that any project over five acres should perform air quality dispersion modeling to assess impacts to nearby sensitive receptors.

Cumulative Emissions Thresholds
The SCAQMD’s 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (2022 AQMP) was prepared to accommodate growth, meet State and Federal air quality standards, and minimize the fiscal impact that pollution control measures have on the local economy. According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, project-related emissions that fall below the established construction and operational thresholds should be considered less than significant unless there is pertinent information to the contrary. If a project exceeds these emission thresholds, the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook states that the significance of a project’s contribution to cumulative impacts should be determined based on whether the rate of growth in ADT exceeds the rate of growth in population.

AIR QUALITY PLAN CONSISTENCY
The City is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), which is bounded by the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto mountains to the north and east and by the Pacific Ocean to the south and west. The SCAQMD has jurisdiction in the Basin, which has a history of recorded air quality violations and is an area where both State and Federal ambient air quality standards are 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 36 City of Beverly Hills
exceeded. Areas that meet ambient air quality standards are classified as attainment areas, while areas that do not meet these standards are classified as nonattainment areas. The air quality in the Riverside County portion of the Basin does not meet the ambient air quality standards for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 and is therefore classified as a nonattainment area for these pollutants. The SCAQMD is required, pursuant to the FCAA, to reduce emissions of the air pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment.

In order to reduce emissions, the SCAQMD adopted the 2022 AQMP which establishes a program of rules and regulations directed at reducing air pollutant emissions and achieving State and Federal air quality standards. The 2022 AQMP is a regional and multi-agency effort including the SCAQMD, California Air Resources Board (CARB), SCAG, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The 2022 AQMP pollutant control strategies are based on the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories, and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. SCAG’s latest growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans. The SCAQMD considers projects that are consistent with the 2022 AQMP, which is intended to bring the Basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants, to have less than significant cumulative impacts along with the proposed project.

Criteria for determining consistency with the 2022 AQMP are defined by the following indicators:

Criterion 1:

With respect to the first criterion, SCAQMD methodologies require that an air quality analysis for a project include forecasts of project emissions in relation to contributing to air quality violations and delay of attainment.
a) Would the project result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations? Since the consistency criteria identified under the first criterion pertains to pollutant concentrations, rather than to total regional emissions, an analysis of the project’s pollutant emissions relative to localized pollutant concentrations is used as the basis for evaluating project consistency. As detailed below, localized concentrations of CO, NOX, and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) would be less than significant; refer to Table 10, Short-Term Construction Emissions, and Table 11, Long-Term Operational Air Emissions. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations. As reactive organic gases (ROGs) are not a criteria pollutant, there is no ambient standard or localized threshold for ROGs. Due to the role ROGs play in ozone formation, it is classified as a precursor pollutant and only a regional emissions threshold has been established. b) Would the project cause or contribute to new air quality violations? As analyzed below under ‘Short-Term Construction Emissions Impacts’ and ‘Long-Term Operational Emissions Impacts’, the proposed project would generate emissions below the 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 37 City of Beverly Hills
SCAQMD’s thresholds for regional and localized emissions; refer to Table 10 and Table 11.

Therefore, the proposed project would not have the potential to cause or affect a violation of the ambient air quality standards.
c) Would the project delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP?
The proposed project would result in less than significant impacts with regard to localized concentrations during project construction. As such, the proposed project would not delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or 2022 AQMP emissions reductions.

Criterion 2:

With respect to the second criterion for determining consistency with SCAQMD and SCAG air quality policies, it is important to recognize that air quality planning within the Basin focuses on attainment of ambient air quality standards at the earliest feasible date. Projections for achieving air quality goals are based on assumptions regarding population, housing, and growth trends. Thus, the SCAQMD’s second criterion for determining project consistency focuses on whether or not the proposed project exceeds the assumptions utilized in preparing the forecasts presented in the 2022 AQMP. Determining whether or not a project exceeds the assumptions reflected in the 2022 AQMP involves the evaluation of the three criteria outlined below. The following discussion provides an analysis of each of these criteria.
a) Would the project be consistent with the population, housing, and employment growth projections utilized in the preparation of the AQMP?
A project is consistent with the 2022 AQMP in part if it is consistent with the population, housing, and employment assumptions that were used in the development of the 2022 AQMP.

In the case of the 2022 AQMP, three sources of data form the basis for the projections of air pollutant emissions: the General Plan, SCAG’s regional growth forecast, and the RTP/SCS.

The RTP/SCS also provides socioeconomic forecast projections of regional population growth.

The General Plan Land Use Map designates the project site as Low Density General Commercial and the Beverly Hills Zoning Map zones the project site as Commercial (C-3) with a Mixed-Use Overlay Zone. Pursuant to Beverly Hills Municipal Code Section 10-3-1601, Uses Permitted, the C-3 zone permits commercial uses, including, but not limited to, cafes, carpenter shop, theater, conservatory, dancing academy, exercise club, library, office, parking garage, shops/stores, studios, etc. Therefore, the proposed commercial building is a permitted use in accordance with the C-3 zoning and would not differ from the current General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designations. Therefore, the proposed project is considered consistent with the General Plan, and is consistent with the types, intensity, and patterns of land use envisioned for the site vicinity. The population, housing, and employment forecasts, which are adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council, are based on the local plans and policies applicable to the City. As the SCAQMD has incorporated these same projections into the 2022 AQMP, it can be concluded that the proposed project would be consistent with the projections. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 38 City of Beverly Hills
b) Would the project implement all feasible air quality mitigation measures? As analyzed below under ‘Short-Term Construction Emissions Impacts’ and ‘Long-Term Operational Emissions Impacts’, the proposed project would not require mitigation and would result in less than significant air quality impacts. In addition, the project would comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, including Rule 403 that requires excessive fugitive dust emissions controlled by regular watering or other dust prevention measures and Rule 1113 that regulates the ROG content of paint. As such, the proposed project meets this 2022 AQMP consistency criterion.
c) Would the project delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP?
Land use planning strategies set forth in the 2022 AQMP are primarily based on the 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS. The project site is located within a quarter mile of access to public transportation (Metro Rapid Bus Stop for bus lines 20/720 and a future Metro Purple Line Subway Stop) and other destinations, including off-site residential, restaurants, and retail.

Further, the project would provide bicycle parking spaces, electric vehicle charging stations, and vanpool/carpool parking spaces on-site to promote alternative transportation options.

Therefore, the project would be consistent with the actions and strategies of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. In addition, as discussed above, the project would be consistent with the General Plan land use designation. As such, the proposed project meets this AQMP consistency criterion.

In conclusion, the determination of consistency with the 2022 AQMP is primarily concerned with the long-term influence of a project on air quality in the Basin. The proposed project would not result in a long-term impact on the region’s ability to meet state and federal air quality standards.

Also, the proposed project would be consistent with the goals and policies of the 2022 AQMP for control of fugitive dust; refer to Impact Statement AQ-2. As discussed above, the proposed project’s long-term influence would also be consistent with the SCAQMD and SCAG’s goals and policies and is, therefore, considered consistent with the 2022 AQMP.

EMISSIONS IMPACTS
Short-Term Construction Emissions Impacts
The project involves construction activities associated with demolition, site preparation, construction, and architectural coating applications. The project would be constructed over approximately 24 months. Exhaust emission factors for typical diesel-powered heavy equipment are based on the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) program defaults. Variables factored into estimating the total construction emissions include the level of activity, length of construction period, number of pieces and types of equipment in use, site characteristics, weather conditions, number of construction personnel, and the amount of materials to be transported onor off-site. The analysis of maximum daily construction emissions has been prepared using CalEEMod. Refer to Appendix C for the CalEEMod outputs and results. Table 10 presents the anticipated daily short-term construction emissions. Maximum daily construction emissions are 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 39 City of Beverly Hills
compared individually for each year to the SCAQMD threshold, not as a whole (added) for all construction years.

Fugitive Dust Emissions
Construction activities are a source of fugitive dust emissions that may have a substantial, temporary impact on local air quality. In addition, fugitive dust may be a nuisance to those living and working in the project area. Fugitive dust emissions are associated with land clearing, ground excavation, cut-and-fill, and truck travel on unpaved roadways (including demolition as well as construction activities). Fugitive dust emissions vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, specific operations, and weather conditions. Fugitive dust from demolition, site preparation, and construction is expected to be short-term and would cease upon project completion. It should be noted that most of this material is inert silicates, rather than the complex organic particulates released from combustion sources, which are more harmful to health.

Table 10
Short-Term Construction Emissions
Emissions Source1
Pollutant (maximum daily emissions in pounds/day)2
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Year 1
Construction Related Emissions2 2.45 28.40 25.00 0.06 2.66 1.43 Year 2
Construction Related Emissions2 9.23 26.10 24.20 0.06 2.52 1.33 Year 3
Construction Related Emissions2 1.17 10.50 14.50 0.03 0.69 0.49 Maximum Daily Emissions 2.45 28.40 25.00 0.06 2.66 1.43 SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Is Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes:

1. Emissions were calculated using CalEEMod, version 2022.1.1.5.

2. Modeling assumptions include compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 which requires: properly maintain mobile and other construction equipment; replace ground cover in disturbed areas quickly; water exposed surfaces three times daily; cover stockpiles with tarps; water all haul roads twice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.

3. The project construction area is approximately 61,542 gross square feet.

Source: Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Air Quality Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix C.

Dust (larger than 10 microns) generated by such activities usually becomes more of a local nuisance than a serious health problem. Of particular health concern is the amount of PM10 (particulate matter smaller than 10 microns) generated as a part of fugitive dust emissions. PM10 poses a serious health hazard alone or in combination with other pollutants. PM2.5 is mostly produced by mechanical processes. These include automobile tire wear, industrial processes such as cutting and grinding, and re-suspension of particles from the ground or road surfaces by wind and human activities such as construction or agriculture. PM2.5 is mostly derived from combustion sources, such as automobiles, trucks, and other vehicle exhaust, as well as from stationary sources. These 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 40 City of Beverly Hills
particles are either directly emitted or are formed in the atmosphere from the combustion of gases such as NOX and sulfur oxides (SOX) combining with ammonia. PM2.5 components from material in the earth’s crust, such as dust, are also present, with the amount varying in different locations.

Construction activities would comply with SCAQMD Rule 403, which requires that excessive fugitive dust emissions be controlled by regular watering or other dust prevention measures.

Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 403 would greatly reduce PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations. It should be noted that these reductions were applied in CalEEMod. As depicted in Table 10, total PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds during construction. Thus, construction air quality impacts would be less than significant.

As presented in Table 10, construction equipment and worker vehicle exhaust emissions would be below the established SCAQMD thresholds. Therefore, air quality impacts from equipment and vehicle exhaust emissions would be less than significant.

ROG Emissions
In addition to gaseous and particulate emissions, the application of asphalt and surface coatings creates ROG emissions, which are O3 precursors. As required, all architectural coatings for the proposed project structures would comply with SCAQMD Regulation XI, Rule 1113 – Architectural Coating. Rule 1113 provides specifications on painting practices as well as regulates the ROG content of paint. ROG emissions associated with the proposed project would be less than significant; refer to Table 10.

Total Daily Construction Emissions
In accordance with the SCAQMD Guidelines, CalEEMod was utilized to model construction emissions for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, and PM2.5. As indicated in Table 10, criteria pollutant emissions during construction of the proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds. Thus, total construction related air emissions would be less than significant.

Asbestos

Asbestos is a term used for several types of naturally occurring fibrous minerals that are a human health hazard when airborne. The most common type of asbestos is chrysotile, but other types such as tremolite and actinolite are also found in California. Asbestos is classified as a known human carcinogen by State, Federal, and international agencies and was identified as a toxic air contaminant by the CARB in 1986.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 41 City of Beverly Hills
Asbestos can be released from serpentinite and ultramafic rocks when the rock is broken or crushed. At the point of release, the asbestos fibers may become airborne, causing air quality and human health hazards. These rocks have been commonly used for unpaved gravel roads, landscaping, fill projects, and other improvement projects in some localities. Asbestos may be released to the atmosphere due to vehicular traffic on unpaved roads, during grading for development projects, and at quarry operations. All of these activities may have the effect of releasing potentially harmful asbestos into the air. Natural weathering and erosion processes can act on asbestos bearing rock and make it easier for asbestos fibers to become airborne if such rock is disturbed. Based on the Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology’s A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California – Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos Report, serpentinite and ultramafic rocks are not known to occur within the project area. Thus, there would be no impact in this regard.

Long-Term Operational Emissions Impacts
Mobile Source Emissions
Mobile sources are emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions.

Table 11
Long-Term Operational Air Emissions
Emissions Source Pollutant (pounds/day)2
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Proposed Project Summer Emissions
Area Source Emissions 0.47 0.01 1.43 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Energy Emissions 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mobile Emissions2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Stationary Sources5 13.20 36.90 33.60 0.06 1.94 1.94
Total Emissions4 13.67 36.91 35.03 0.06 1.94 1.94
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Is Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Proposed Project Winter Emissions
Area Source Emissions 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Emissions 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mobile Emissions2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Stationary Sources4 13.20 36.90 33.60 0.06 1.94 1.94
Total Emissions3 13.43 36.90 33.60 0.06 1.94 1.94
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 42 City of Beverly Hills
Emissions Source
Pollutant (pounds/day)2
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Is Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes:

1. Emissions were calculated using CalEEMod, version 2022.1.1.5 and the California Air Resources Board, Emission FACtor (EMFAC 2017) web database.

2. The proposed project would result in a net negative trip generation over existing condition. As such, zero trip generation is modeled as a conservative analysis.

3. The number may be slightly off due to rounding

4. Stationary sources of emission refer to the emergency generator for the project; refer to Exhibit 3d, Floor Plan – Penthouse. As a conservative analysis, the project assumes the horsepower of the emergency generator would be 335 horsepower and running time would be 24 hours per year during emergency.

Source: Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Air Quality Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix C.

Area Source Emissions
Area source emissions would be generated from consumer products, architectural coating, hearths, and landscaping. As shown in Table 11, area source emissions from the proposed project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, or PM2.5. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Energy Source Emissions
Energy source emissions would be generated because of electricity usage associated with the proposed project. Based on information provided by project applicant, the project would not consume any natural gas on-site. The primary use of electricity by the project would be for space heating and cooling, water heating, ventilation, lighting, appliances, and electronics. Criteria air pollutant emissions from electricity use were not quantified since criteria pollutants emission occur at the site of power plant, which is off-site. Therefore, energy source emissions from electricity usage would be zero. As shown in Table 3, energy source emissions from the proposed project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, or PM2.5.

Stationary Source Emissions
Stationary source emissions would be generated from the proposed emergency generator on the rooftop. As a conservative analysis, the analysis assumes the project would use the emergency generator with 335 horsepower for 24 hours per year. As shown in Table 3, stationary source emissions from the proposed project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, or PM2.5.

Air Quality Health Impacts
Adverse health effects induced by criteria pollutant emissions are highly dependent on a multitude of interconnected variables (e.g., cumulative concentrations, local meteorology and atmospheric conditions, and the number and character of exposed individual [e.g., age, gender]). In particular, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 43 City of Beverly Hills
ozone precursors volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and NOx affect air quality on a regional scale. Health effects related to ozone are therefore the product of emissions generated by numerous sources throughout a region. Existing models have limited sensitivity to small changes in criteria pollutant concentrations, and, as such, translating project-generated criteria pollutants to specific health effects or additional days of nonattainment would produce meaningless results.

In other words, the project’s less than significant increases in regional air pollution from criteria air pollutants would have nominal or negligible impacts on human health.

As noted in the Brief of Amicus Curiae by the SCAQMD in Sierra Club et al. v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502, the SCAQMD acknowledged it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible to quantify health impacts of criteria pollutants for various reasons including modeling both limitations and where in the atmosphere air pollutants interact and form. Further, as noted in the Brief of Amicus Curiae by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) for the same case, SJVAPCD has acknowledged that currently available modeling tools are not equipped to provide a meaningful analysis of the correlation between an individual development project’s air emissions and specific human health impacts.

The SCAQMD acknowledges that health effects quantification from ozone, as an example is correlated with the increases in ambient level of ozone in the air (concentration) that an individual person breathes. SCAQMD’s Brief of Amicus Curiae states that it would take a large amount of additional emissions to cause a modeled increase in ambient ozone levels over the entire region.

The SCAQMD states that based on their own modeling in the SCAQMD’s 2012 Air Quality Management Plan, a reduction of 432 tons (864,000 pounds) per day of NOX and a reduction of 187 tons (374,000 pounds) per day of VOCs would reduce ozone levels at highest monitored site by only nine parts per billion. As such, the SCAQMD concludes that it is not currently possible to accurately quantify ozone-related health impacts caused by NOX or VOC emissions from relatively small projects (defined as projects with regional scope) due to photochemistry and regional model limitations. As such, for the purpose of this analysis, since the project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for construction and operational air emissions, the project would have a less than significant impact for air quality health impacts as well.

Cumulative Impacts
With respect to the proposed project’s construction-related air quality emissions and cumulative Basin-wide conditions, the SCAQMD has developed strategies to reduce criteria pollutant emissions outlined in the 2022 AQMP pursuant to FCAA mandates. As such, the proposed project would comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements and the adopted 2022 AQMP emissions control measures. Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with the best available control measures in order to reduce dust so that it does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the proposed project. Per SCAQMD rules and mandates, as well as the CEQA requirement that significant impacts be mitigated to the extent feasible, these same requirements (i.e., Rule 403 compliance, the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, and compliance 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 44 City of Beverly Hills
with adopted 2022 AQMP emissions control measures) would also be imposed on construction projects throughout the Basin, which would include related projects.

As discussed previously, the proposed project would not result in short- or long-term air quality impacts, as emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD adopted construction or operational thresholds; refer to Table 10 and Table 11. Additionally, adherence to SCAQMD rules and regulations would alleviate potential impacts related to cumulative conditions on a project-byproject basis. Emission reduction technology, strategies, and plans are constantly being developed.

As a result, the proposed project would not contribute a cumulatively considerable net increase of any nonattainment criteria pollutant. Therefore, the project’s incremental operational impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable. Impacts in this regard are less than significant.

SENSITIVE RECEPTORS
Sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses. Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. CARB has identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis.

The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a single-family residence located approximately 12 feet to the north of the project site. In order to identify impacts to sensitive receptors, the SCAQMD recommends addressing LSTs for construction and operations impacts (area sources only). The CO hotspot analysis, following the LST analysis, addresses localized mobile source impacts.

The SCAQMD recommends that any project over five acres in size should perform air quality dispersion modeling to assess impacts to nearby sensitive receptors from area source emissions.

For LST analysis purposes, SCAQMD is divided into 38 SRAs, each of which contain specific localized air quality emission thresholds for CO, NOX, PM2.5, and PM10 to determine local air quality impacts. The project is located in SRA 2 (Northwest Coastal LA County). 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 45 City of Beverly Hills
Construction
The SCAQMD guidance on applying CalEEMod to LSTs specifies the number of acres a particular piece of equipment would likely disturb per day.6 SCAQMD provides LST thresholds for one-, two-, and five-acre site disturbance areas; SCAQMD does not provide LST thresholds for projects over five acres. The project would actively disturb approximately half acre per day during the grading phase of construction. Therefore, the LST thresholds for one acre were conservatively utilized for the construction LST analysis. The closest sensitive receptor is a singlefamily residence located approximately 12 feet to the north of the project boundary. These sensitive land uses may be potentially affected by air pollutant emissions generated during on-site construction activities. LST thresholds are provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters. According to SCAQMD LST Methodology, projects with boundaries located closer than 25 meters to the nearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters. As the nearest sensitive receptor is located approximately 12 feet from the planned construction area, the LST values for 25 meters (164 feet) were used.

As discussed, the closest sensitive receptor is a single-family residence located approximately 12 feet to the north of the project boundary. All other existing homes surrounding the project site are at least 50 feet away from the nearest construction areas. These sensitive land uses may be potentially affected by air pollutant emissions generated during on-site construction activities. LST thresholds are provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters.

As the nearest sensitive receptor is located approximately 12 feet from the planned construction area, the LST values for 25 meters (164 feet) were used.

Table 12, Localized Significance of Construction Emissions, shows the localized construction-related emissions. It is noted that the localized emissions presented in Table 12 are less than those in Table 10 because localized emissions include only on-site emissions (i.e., from construction equipment and fugitive dust), and do not include off-site emissions (i.e., from worker, vendor, and hauling trips). As seen in Table 12, emissions would not exceed the LSTs for SRA 2. Therefore, construction LST impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

Operations
According to SCAQMD localized significance threshold methodology, LSTs would apply to the operational phase of a proposed project if the project includes stationary sources or attracts mobile sources that may spend extended periods queuing and idling at the site (e.g., warehouse or transfer facilities). The proposed project does not include such uses. Thus, due to the lack of such emissions, no long-term localized significance threshold analysis is necessary. Operational LST impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
6 The number of acres represent the total acres traversed by grading equipment. In order to properly grade a piece of land, multiple passes with equipment may be required. The disturbance acreage is based on the equipment list and days of the grading phase according to the anticipated maximum number of acres a given piece of equipment can pass over in an 8-hour workday. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 46 City of Beverly Hills
Table 12
Localized Significance of Construction Emissions
Maximum Emissions
Pollutant (pounds/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Year 12 22.50 21.90 1.86 1.02
Year 23 20.50 21.00 1.11 0.91
Year 34 11.30 13.60 0.55 0.51
Maximum Daily Emissions (on-site) 22.50 21.90 1.86 1.02 Localized Significance Threshold5 103 562 4 3
Thresholds Exceeded? No No No No
Notes:

1. The maximum daily construction emissions include fugitive dust control measures required by SCAQMD Rule 403, which includes the following: properly maintain mobile and other construction equipment; replace ground cover in disturbed areas quickly; water exposed surfaces three times daily; cover stock piles with tarps; water all haul roads twice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.

2. The maximum on-site daily emissions occur during demolition phase for NOX, CO, and PM10, and during grading phase for PM2.5 in Year 1.

3. The maximum on-site daily emissions occur during grading phase for NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 in Year 2.

4. The maximum on-site daily emissions occur during building construction phase for NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 in Year 3.

5. The Localized Significance Threshold was determined using Appendix C of the SCAQMD Final Localized Significant Threshold Methodology guidance document for pollutants NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. The Localized Significance Threshold was based on the anticipated daily acreage disturbance for construction (the thresholds for 1 acre were used), the distance to sensitive receptors (25 meters), and the source receptor area (SRA 2).

Source: Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Air Quality Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix C.

Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
CO emissions are a function of vehicle idling time, meteorological conditions, and traffic flow.

Under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthful levels (i.e., adversely affecting residents, school children, hospital patients, the elderly, etc.).

The SCAQMD requires a quantified assessment of CO hotspots when a project increases the volume-to-capacity ratio (also called the intersection capacity utilization) by 0.02 (two percent) for any intersection with an existing level of service LOS D or worse. Because traffic congestion is highest at intersections where vehicles queue and are subject to reduced speeds, these hot spots are typically produced at intersections.

The Basin is designated as an attainment/maintenance area for the Federal CO standards and an attainment area for State standards. There has been a decline in CO emissions even though vehicle miles traveled on U.S. urban and rural roads have increased. Nationwide estimated anthropogenic CO emissions have decreased 68 percent between 1990 and 2014. In 2014, mobile sources accounted for 82 percent of the nation’s total anthropogenic CO emissions. CO emissions have continued to decline since this time. The Basin was re-designated as attainment in 2007 and is no longer addressed in the SCAQMD’s AQMP. Three major control programs have contributed to the reduced per-vehicle CO emissions: exhaust standards, cleaner burning fuels, and motor vehicle inspection/maintenance programs.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 47 City of Beverly Hills
A detailed CO analysis was conducted in the Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (CO Plan) for the SCAQMD’s 2003 Air Quality Management Plan, which is the most recent AQMP that addresses CO concentrations. The locations selected for microscale modeling in the CO Plan are worst-case intersections in the Basin and would likely experience the highest CO concentrations.

Thus, CO analysis within the CO Plan is utilized in a comparison to the proposed project, since it represents a worst-case scenario with heavy traffic volumes within the Basin.

Of these locations, the Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection in Los Angeles experienced the highest CO concentration (4.6 parts per million [ppm]), which is well below the 35-ppm 1-hr CO Federal standard. The Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection is one of the most congested intersections in Southern California with an ADT volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day. As the CO hotspots were not experienced at the Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection, it can be reasonably inferred that CO hotspots would not be experienced at any intersections within the City near the project site due to the comparatively low volume of traffic (51 peak trips in the a.m. and 31 peak trips during the p.m.) that would occur as a result of project implementation. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

OBJECTIONABLE ODORS
According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The proposed project does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with odors.

Construction activity associated with the project may generate detectable odors from heavy-duty equipment exhaust and architectural coating. However, construction-related odors would be short-term in nature and cease upon project completion. In addition, the project would be required to comply with the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485, which minimizes the idling time of construction equipment either by shutting it off when not in use or by reducing the time of idling to no more than five minutes. This would further reduce the detectable odors from heavy-duty equipment exhaust. The project would also comply with the SCAQMD Regulation XI Rule 1113, which would minimize odor impacts from ROG emissions during architectural coating. As such, impacts to existing adjacent land uses would be short-term and less than significant.

D. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The following analysis is based on the 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum (GHG Memorandum), prepared by Michael Baker International, dated March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix D, GHG Memorandum.

California is a substantial contributor of global greenhouse gases (GHGs), emitting over 420 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) per year. Methane (CH4) is also an 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 48 City of Beverly Hills
important GHG that potentially contributes to global climate change. GHGs are global in their effect, which is to increase the earth’s ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere. As primary GHGs have a long lifetime in the atmosphere, accumulate over time, and are generally well-mixed, their impact on the atmosphere is mostly independent of the point of emission. Every nation emits GHGs and as a result makes an incremental cumulative contribution to global climate change; therefore, global cooperation will be required to reduce the rate of GHG emissions enough to slow or stop the human-caused increase in average global temperatures and associated changes in climatic conditions.

The City has not adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing impacts related to GHG emissions. Similarly, the SCAQMD, CARB, or any other State or regional agency have not yet adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing GHG emissions that is applicable to the project. Since there is no applicable adopted or accepted numerical threshold of significance for GHG emissions, the methodology for evaluating the project’s impacts related to GHG emissions focuses on its consistency with statewide, regional, and local plans adopted for the purpose of reducing and/or mitigating GHG emissions. This evaluation of consistency with such plans is the sole basis for determining the significance of the project’s GHG-related impacts on the environment.

Notwithstanding, for informational purposes, the analysis also calculates the amount of GHG emissions that would be attributable to the project using recommended air quality models, as described below. The primary purpose of quantifying the project’s GHG emissions is to satisfy State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(a), which calls for a good-faith effort to describe and calculate emissions. The estimated emissions inventory is also used to determine if there would be a reduction in the project’s incremental contribution of GHG emissions as a result of compliance with regulations and requirements adopted to implement plans for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions. However, the significance of the project’s GHG emissions impacts is not based on the amount of GHG emissions resulting from the project.

GHG EMISSIONS IMPACTS
The proposed project would result in direct and indirect emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4, and would not result in other GHGs that would facilitate a meaningful analysis. Therefore, this analysis focuses on these three forms of GHG emissions. Direct project-related GHG emissions include emissions from construction activities, area sources, and mobile sources, while indirect sources include emissions from electricity consumption, water demand, and solid waste generation.

Operational GHG estimations are based on energy emissions from natural gas usage and automobile emissions. The most recent version of CalEEMod, version 2022.1.1.5, as well as the CARB’s EMission FACtor Model (EMFAC 2017), was used to calculate direct and indirect project related GHG emissions. Table 13, Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions, presents the estimated CO2, N2O, and CH4 emissions of the proposed project. CalEEMod outputs are contained within Appendix D.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 49 City of Beverly Hills
Table 13
Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Source
CO2 CH4 N2O Total
Metric
Tons of
CO2eq3
Metric
Tons/year1
Metric
Tons/year1
Metric
Tons of
CO2eq2
Metric
Tons/year1
Metric
Tons of
CO2eq2
Direct Emissions
• Construction5 28.83 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 28.85
• Area Source 0.67 <0.01 0.13 <0.01 1.50 2.30
• Mobile Source4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total Direct Emissions3 29.50 <0.01 0.13 <0.01 1.51 31.15 Indirect Emissions
• Energy 46.1 <0.01 0.13 <0.01 1.50 47.73
• Solid Waste 0.54 0.05 1.30 0.00 0.00 1.84
• Water Demand 4.09 0.07 1.80 <0.01 1.50 7.39
Total Indirect Emissions3 50.73 0.12 3.23 <0.01 3.00 56.96 Total Project-Related Emissions3 88.10 MTCO2e/yr
MTCO2eq = Metric Tons Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
Notes:

1. Emissions calculated using the CalEEMod version 2022.1.1.5. and the California Air Resources Board EMission FACtor model (EMFAC 2017).

2. Carbon dioxide equivalent values calculated using the EPA Website, Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator, https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator, accessed February 27, 2023.

3. Totals may be slightly off due to rounding.

4. The mobile source emissions were calculated using the trip generation data provided in the Coco Traffic Planners, Inc, 8366 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis, dated July 31, 2023.

5. Total project construction GHG emissions equate to 865.43 MTCO2e. However, construction emissions are amortized over the lifetime of the project (assumed to be 30 years) and added to operational GHG emissions consistent with SCAQMD’s guidance.

Source: Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix D.

Direct Project-Related Source of Greenhouse Gases
Construction Emissions
Construction GHG emissions are amortized (i.e., total construction emissions divided by the lifetime of the project, assumed to be 30 years), then added to the operational emissions. As seen in Table 13, construction of the proposed project would result in a total of 28.85 MTCO2e (amortized over 30 years) which represents a total of approximately 865.43 MTCO2e from construction activities.

Area Source
The project would result in nominal area source emissions; refer to Table 13. Area source emissions would be generated from consumer products, architectural coating, and landscaping.

As shown in Table 2, the project would result in 2.30 MTCO2e/year of area source emissions.

Mobile Source Emissions
According to the Parking Analysis (Appendix A), typical daily activities are forecast to generate 281 average daily trips, including 51 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 31 trips during the p.m. peak hour. The proposed project would result in a net decrease in traffic generation as the existing 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 50 City of Beverly Hills
development generates 484 average daily trips, resulting in a net negative of 203 daily trips. The CalEEMod modeled zero daily trip for the project as a conservative analysis. Therefore, the project would not generate mobile source emissions over existing condition; refer to Table 13.

Indirect Project-Related Source of Greenhouse Gases
Energy Consumption
Energy consumption emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod model and project-specific land use data. Electricity would be provided to the project site via Southern California Edison (SCE). The project would indirectly result in 47.73 MTCO2e/year of GHG emissions due to energy consumption; refer to Table 13.

Water Demand
The proposed project’s operations would result in a demand of approximately 2.3 million gallons of water per year. Emissions from indirect energy impacts due to water supply would result in 7.39 MTCO2e/year; refer to Table 13.

Solid Waste
Solid waste associated with operations of the proposed project would result in 1.84 MTCO2eq/year; refer to Table 13.

Total Project-Related Sources of Greenhouse Gases
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(a), and as shown in Table 13, the total amount of proposed project-related GHG emissions from direct and indirect sources combined would total

88.10 MTCO2eq/yr. The analysis below provides a discussion of the project’s compliance with regulations and requirements adopted to implement plans for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.

GHG PLAN CONSISTENCY
Scoping Plan Consistency
The goal to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (Executive Order S-3-05) was codified by the Legislature as the 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32). In 2008, CARB approved a Scoping Plan as required by AB 32. The Scoping Plan has a range of GHG reduction actions which include direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, market-based mechanisms such as a cap-and-trade system, and an AB 32 implementation fee to fund the program.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 51 City of Beverly Hills
The 2022 Scoping Plan identifies reduction measures necessary to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier. Actions that reduce GHG emissions are identified for each AB 32 inventory sector. Provided in Table 14, Consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan: AB 32 GHG Inventory Sectors, is an evaluation of applicable reduction actions/strategies by emissions source category to determine how the project would be consistent with or exceed reduction actions/strategies outlined in the 2022 Scoping Plan.

Table 14
Consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan: AB 32 Inventory Sectors Actions and Strategies Project Consistency Analysis
Smart Growth / Vehicles Miles Traveled (VMT)
Reduce VMT per capita to 25% below 2019 levels by
2030, and 30% below 2019 levels by 2045.

Consistent. According to Automated Parking Analysis, the project would generate net negative daily trip generation compared to existing condition. Additionally, the project would be within 0.07 miles of transit station, provide bicycle parking spaces, electric vehicle charging station, and
vanpool/carpool parking which would promote alternative mode of transportation and reduce VMT. As such, the
project would be consistent with the strategy.

New Residential and Commercial Buildings
All electric appliances beginning 2026 (residential) and 2029 (commercial), contributing to 6 million heat pumps installed statewide by 2030.

Consistent. The project would not use natural gas on-site.

Therefore, the project is consistent with this action.

Source: Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix D
Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan Consistency
The City adopted the Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan (SCP), which contains goals intended to support sustainable development within the City. Implementation of the SCP would contribute to a reduction in the City’s overall GHG emissions. Furthermore, the General Plan contains several goals related to GHG emission reduction. Table 15, Project Consistency with Applicable Goals and Policies of the Beverly Hills General Plan and Sustainable City Plan, compares the proposed project to applicable policies from the General Plan and SCP.

In summary, the project’s location and land use characteristics render it consistent with statewide and regional climate change mandates, plans, policies, and recommendations. More specifically, the GHG plan consistency analysis provided above demonstrates that the project complies with the regulations and GHG reduction actions/strategies outlined in the General Plan, SCP, and Scoping Plan. Consistency with these plans would reduce the impact of the project’s incremental contribution of GHG emissions. Accordingly, the project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, regulation, or recommendation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.

Therefore, impacts with regard to climate change would be less than significant. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 52 City of Beverly Hills
Table 15
Project Consistency with Applicable Goals and Policies of the Beverly Hills General Plan and Sustainable City Plan Goal/Policy Project Consistency
City of Beverly Hills General Plan
Land Use Element
LU-14 (Environmental Sustainability and Carbon
Footprint): Land uses and built form that are
environmentally sustainable by minimizing consumption of scarce resources, pollution, greenhouse gas emissions,
wastes, and exposure of residents and visitors to toxics and hazards.

Consistent. The project would involve demolishing the existing singlestory commercial building and surface parking lot and constructing an approximately 61,542-gross square feet (25,566-net square feet) commercial building with three floors of office spaces, a penthouse/rooftop, and two levels of basement parking The basement parking would accommodate 76 parking spaces.

The City adopted the California Green Building Standards Code as BHMC Section 9-1-1101, Adoption of the California Green Building Standards Code, which requires new buildings to implement sustainability techniques related to site development, indoor/outdoor water use, material conservation, etc. The proposed project would comply with BHMC and the 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, more energy efficient than the existing building. Additionally, the project would exceed title 24 standard by 6.1 percent. As such, the project would be consistent with the goal.

Open Space Element
OS 7 (Improved Air Quality): Improved health and
sustainability of the community through improved regional air quality and reduced greenhouse gas emissions that
contribute to climate change.

OS 7.9: Work with the California Air Resources Board
(CARB) and the SCAQMD to comply with Statewide
greenhouse gas reduction goals as established in AB
32 and other subsequent legislation.

Consistent. Refer to Table 14 discussion on project’s consistency with the AB 32 and the Scoping Plan, as well as the discussion under Land Use Element LU-14 (Environmental Sustainability and Carbon Footprint).

As such, the project would be consistent with the goal.

City of Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan
Climate Change and Air Quality
Combat climate change and improve air quality.

Consistent. Refer to Table 14 consistency with the AB 32 and the Scoping Plan, as well as the discussion under Land Use Element LU-14 (Environmental Sustainability and Carbon Footprint). As such, the project would be consistent with the goal.

Energy
Encourage the use of energy in a clean and efficient manner and the use of renewable energy sources.

Consistent. The proposed project would comply with the 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which is more energy efficient than the existing building, through environmentally- sensitive architecture and building systems. The project would also install solar-ready roof. The project would include energy-efficient lighting and all electric landscape equipment. Additionally, the project would not consume natural gas onsite. As such, the project would be consistent with the goal.

Land Use, Transportation, and Open Space
Foster an energy-efficient, walkable community that
provides ample goods, services, and benefits to all
residents while respecting the local environment.

Consistent. The proposed project is an infill development located within CARB-designated Central Business District; refer to Appendix D. The project site is located within a quarter-mile of access to public transportation (Metro Rapid Bus Stop for bus lines 20/720 and a future Metro Purple Line Subway Stop) and other destinations, including off-site residential, restaurants, and retail. Therefore, walking or bicycling would be viable modes of transportation to reach numerous destinations or public transit. As such, the project would be consistent with the goal.

Source: Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023; refer to Appendix D.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 53 City of Beverly Hills
E. WATER QUALITY
As part of Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has established regulations under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program to control direct stormwater discharges. In California, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) administers the NPDES permitting program and is responsible for developing NPDES permitting requirements. The NPDES program regulates industrial pollutant discharges, including those generated during construction activities. The SWRCB works in coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) to preserve, protect, enhance, and restore water quality. The project site is within the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles RWQCB. The Los Angeles RWQCB addresses the obligation to implement the CWA by periodically issuing permits for the County and its incorporated cities, including Beverly Hills.

In September 2016, the Los Angeles RWQCB reissued the Los Angeles County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit (Los Angeles County MS4 Permit) as Order R4-2012-0175 (NPDES Permit No. CAS004001, as amended by State Water Board Order WQ 2015-0075 and Los Angeles Water Board Order R4-2012-0175-A01), Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharges within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County, Except Those Discharges Originating from the City of Long Beach MS4. 7 The City is a co-permittee on the Los
Angeles County MS4 Permit and is required to adhere to the CWA requirements.

The project site is developed with an existing commercial building and associate surface parking areas and is entirely paved with no pervious surfaces. Stormwater runoff currently drains to existing City drainage facilities. Development of the proposed project would change the permeability or hydrology of the site. As discussed in Criterion (a), above, the proposed project would include a six-foot wide ground level green space setback along the northern project boundary, including Pacific Wax myrtle. The proposed landscaping would increase the amount of pervious surfaces on-site when compare to existing development, and would allow for stormwater runoff management via infiltration along the northern project boundary. Therefore, the project would provide an improvement in regard to water quality management.

Moreover, the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit requirements are incorporated into BHMC Title 9 Chapter 4 Article 5, Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control. Specifically, Section 9-4-508, Planning and Land Development Program Requirements for New Development and Redevelopment; Low Impact Development, requires redevelopment projects, such as the proposed project, to control pollutants and runoff volume from the project site by minimizing impervious surface areas and/or controlling runoff through infiltration, bioretention, and/or rainfall harvest and use, in accordance 7 California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region, Order No. R4-2012-0175-A01 Amending Order No. R4-2012-0175 as amended by State Water Board Order WQ 2015-0075 NPDES Permit No. CAS004001, September 8, 2016,
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/stormwater/municipal/los_angeles_ms4/2016/R 4-2012-0175-A01.pdf, accessed March 2, 2023.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 54 City of Beverly Hills
with the standards set forth in the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit. Compliance with the City’s Low Impact Development Ordinance would be required as a condition of approval and would ensure water quality standards are met during project construction and operations. As such, the project would not result in any significant effects relating to water quality.

CRITERION (e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

The proposed project would demolish an approximately 6,877-square foot vacant commercial building and construct a 61,542-gross square foot commercial office building in its place. Thus, the proposed project would increase demand for public services and utilities. However, the existing building is already served and connected to the City’s utilities and public services and the project is consistent with the site’s existing land use designation and zoning. Thus, payment of standard utilities connection fees and ongoing user fees would offset the project’s impacts on existing water, sewer, stormwater, dry utilities, and solid waste collection services. The City of Beverly Hills Public Works Department would continue to provide water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste collection services to the site; and Southern California Edison would continue to provide electricity services; refer to Appendix E, Will Serve Letters.

Additionally, the proposed project is consistent with land uses in the area and would not require the expansion of the Beverly Hills Police and Fire Departments service area or increase calls for service.

Although the proposed project would result in nominal indirect population growth (from potential project-generated employees moving into the City), the proposed office use would not induce substantial unplanned population growth beyond the site’s former restaurant use. Thus, the project would not substantially increase demand for police and fire protection services. Overall, the site would be adequately served by all required utilities and services and the project would meet Criterion (e) requirements.

V. CLASS 5 EXEMPTION CRITERIA ANALYSIS
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15305 states that categorical exemption “Class 5 consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20%, which do not result in any changes in land use or density, including but not limited to: (a) Minor lot line adjustments, side yard, and set back variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcel; (b) Issuance of minor encroachment permits; (c) Reversion to acreage in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act.

It is acknowledged that the Zone Text Amendment would apply to any properties in the City of Beverly Hills, in which the “alternative parking facility” could apply. However, the City of Beverly Hills is located in an urbanized area on relatively flat land. Slopes are not anticipated to exceed 20 percent. The proposed Zone Text Amendment would amend the definition of alternative parking facilities. The project site is currently designated as a Low Density General Commercial (C-3).

Pursuant to BHMC Section 10-3-1601, Uses Permitted, the C-3 zone permits commercial uses, including, but not limited to, cafes, carpenter shop, theater, conservatory, dancing academy, exercise 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 55 City of Beverly Hills
club, library, office, parking garage, shops/stores, studios, etc. Future commercial projects that could rely on the proposed definition of the alternative parking facility would not involve alteration to land use limitation since the land use designation and zone districts would retain the same as it currently is.

As a result, this project is eligible for a Categorical Exemption Class 5.

VI. EXCEPTIONS
CRITERION (a) LOCATION State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300.2 states that categorical exemption “Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.”
For the Class 5 CE, the City is located in a developed region in Beverly Hills. The Zoning Text Amendment would not involve a sensitive environment according to Beverly Hills’ General Plan and would not impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern as none are known to exist on the site according to federal, state and local agency reports. It is acknowledged that Criterion (a) does not apply to a Class 32 CE.

CRITERION (b) CUMULATIVE IMPACT State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300.2 states that all categorical exemptions “are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.” As applicable to the Class 32 CE, the project proposes to demolish the existing single-story commercial building and surface parking lot. No successive projects of the same type in the same place would occur over time. The project is consistent with applicable General Plan land use policies and, with approval of a Conditional Use Permit to accommodate the commercial corner, along with Site Plan Review for potentially increased traffic, is permitted under the City’s Zoning Code.

Therefore, potential cumulative effects are not anticipated and Exception Criterion (b) would not apply to the project.

As applicable to the Class 5 CE, the proposed Zone Text Amendment would allow for automated parking in accordance with the City’s revised definition of an “alternative parking facility”. Such changes would not result in significant physical environmental effects that could be cumulatively considerable.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 56 City of Beverly Hills
CRITERION (c) SIGNIFICANT EFFECT State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300.2 states that a categorical exemption “shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.”
For the Class 32 CE, the project would not result in any significant effects on the environment due to unusual circumstances. Historically, the building has always housed a commercial use, and the proposed project would not result in a change of use. The site is not located within a sensitive resource area and no site-specific environmental constraints, such as biological resources, geology and soils, and hazards and hazardous material exist on-site; refer to Exception Criterion (f) for a discussion regarding historical resources. The project is a permitted use under the site’s General Commercial designation and would meet all development standards under the C3 zoning district with approval of a Conditional Use Permit to accommodate a commercial corner along with Site Plan Review for potentially increased traffic.

CRITERION (d) SCENIC HIGHWAYS State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300.2 states that a categorical exemption “shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR.”
For the Class 32 CE, based on the California Department of Transportation’s California Scenic Highway Mapping System, there are no scenic highways near the project site.8 The closest officially designated or eligible State scenic highway is U.S. Route 101 located approximately nine miles to the west. Given the distance of the project site to U.S. Route 101, the project would not be visible from U.S. Route 101. As such, the proposed project would have no impact on scenic resources within an eligible State scenic highway and Exception Criterion (d) would not apply.

As applicable to the Class 5 CE, the proposed revised definition of an “alternative parking facility” would not result in any physical environmental impacts associated with scenic highways. 8 California Department of Transportation, California Scenic Highway Mapping System, https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa, accessed February 9, 2023.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 57 City of Beverly Hills
CRITERION (e) HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300.2 states that a categorical exemption “shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.” Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the Department of Toxic Substance Control and State Water Resources Control Board to compile and update a regulatory sites listing (per the criteria of the Section). The California Department of Health Services is also required to compile and update, as appropriate, a list of all public drinking water wells that contain detectable levels of organic contaminants and that are subject to water analysis pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 116395. Section 65962.5 requires the local enforcement agency, as designated pursuant to Section 18051 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), to compile, as appropriate, a list of all solid waste disposal facilities from which there is a known migration of hazardous waste.

For the Class 32 CE, the project site is not currently listed pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (Cortese List).9 Therefore, Exception Criterion (e) would not apply to the project.

As applicable to the Class 5 CE, the proposed revised definition of an “alternative parking facility” would not result in any physical environmental impacts associated with hazardous materials sites pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.

CRITERION (f) HISTORICAL RESOURCES State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300.2 states that a categorical exemption “shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.” For the Class 32 CE, according to the Los Angeles County Assessor’s records, the project site is currently developed with one commercial office/retail building identified as 8625, 8631, 8633, and 8635 Wilshire Boulevard. Originally constructed in 1933, the building is not identified as a potential historic resource in any of the City’s historical resources surveys.10 Additionally, no architect was accredited for the design of the existing building.
11 Thus, the existing building is not known to be
associated with events that have made significant contributions to the broad patterns of California’s history nor with the lives of persons who have historic significance. The building also does not embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, possess high artistic value, or represent a significant and distinguishable entity. Moreover, the building is not likely to yield information important in prehistory or history. Therefore, it is ineligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources, or for designation as a City landmark. As such, demolition of the existing building as part of the proposed project would not 9 California Environmental Protection Agency, Cortese List Data Resources, https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/, accessed February 9, 2023. 10 Written Correspondence: Reina Kapadia, Christine Delostrinos, and Mark Odell, Design Team, City of Beverly Hills Community Development, October 23, 2019. 11 Ibid. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 58 City of Beverly Hills
result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource and this exception would not apply.

As applicable to the Class 5 CE, the proposed revised definition of an “alternative parking facility” would not result in any physical environmental impacts to historical resources.

VII. CONCLUSION
Based on this analysis, the proposed 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project meets all criteria for a Class 32 CE pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 and a Class 5 CE pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15305. Further, none of the exceptions, listed pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2, apply to the proposed project.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
CEQA Class 32 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions Report August 2023 59 City of Beverly Hills
VIII. REFERENCES
California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California – Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring of Asbestos Report, August 2000.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region, Order No. R4-2012-0175-A01 Amending Order No. R4-2012-0175 as amended by State Water Board Order WQ 2015-0075 NPDES Permit No. CAS004001, September 8, 2016,
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/stormwater/municipal/lo s_angeles_ms4/2016/R4-2012-0175-A01.pdf, accessed March 2, 2023.

City of Beverly Hills, Beverly Hills General Plan Map LU1 General Plan Land Use Designations, January 25, 2022,
https://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/1807037749744115284/Landuse_11x17_2 0220125.pdf, accessed February 2, 2023.

City of Beverly Hills, City of Beverly Hills General Plan, April 30, 2010.

City of Beverly Hills, City of Beverly Hills Zoning Map, October 5, 2021, https://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/159992164172431006/Zoning_11_17_Fina l20211005.pdf, accessed February 2, 2023.

Coco Traffic Planners, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis, July 31, 2023.

EPA Website, Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator, https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gasequivalencies-calculator, accessed February 27, 2023.

Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Air Quality Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023
Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023.

Michael Baker International, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Noise Technical Memorandum, March 3, 2023 Santa Monica Municipal Airport, 2021 CNEL Noise Contours, https://www.santamonica.gov/media/Public%20Works/Airport/noise%20reports/2021_CNE L_annual_report.pdf, May 2022.

State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, page 10, April 2018.

Written Correspondence: Reina Kapadia, Christine Delostrinos, and Mark Odell, Design Team, City of Beverly Hills Community Development, October 23, 2019.

APPENDIX A
Trip Generation Analysis/Parking Analysis
This page is intentionally left blank.
8633 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD

OFFICE BUILDING DEVELOPMENT

AUTOMATED PARKING ANALYSIS

BEVERLY HILLS - CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:

Skanska USA Commercial Development
633 W. 5th Street, 68th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071
Updated on:

July 31, 2023
COCO TRAFFIC PLANNERS, INC.
8633 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD

OFFICE BUILDING DEVELOPMENT

AUTOMATED PARKING ANALYSIS

BEVERLY HILLS - CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:

Skanska USA Commercial Development
633 W. 5th Street, 68th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071
Updated on:

July 31, 2023
Prepared by:

COCO TRAFFIC PLANNERS, INC.
10835 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 202
Los Angeles, California 90025
Ph/Fax: (310) 470-4870
E-mail: [email protected]
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development
Automated Parking Analysis - Beverly Hills, California

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A 25,566 sf office building has been proposed for development at 8633 Wilshire Boulevard, in the City of Beverly Hills, California. The proposed project will replace an existing one story commercial building. The project will be accessible via a 2-way driveway on Carson Road, and will be supported by a subterranean parking garage with a total supply of 76 parking stalls. At the present time, the parking facility is planned to utilize an automated parking system which will operate over two underground parking floors. A preliminary automated parking system layout, shows that a total of four staging stalls will be provided for inbound vehicles waiting to enter the automated parking system. These will be in addition to the two vehicles being processed in the system.

In order to estimate the effectiveness of the proposed automated parking system in processing the Project’s arrival traffic volumes, an analysis was conducted to estimate the number of staging parking stalls needed, as well as the length of queues potentially created at the garage’s access point.

While the analysis was conducted under “worst case scenarios”, it found that traffic operations offered by the proposed Automated Parking System will be very efficient, with relatively short cycle and waiting times. Therefore, it is expected that the system will operate even better and more efficiently under normal conditions of full operation.

The four vehicles queueing length, besides the two vehicles being served in the system, will address the staging needs of the proposed Automated Parking System, virtually under any circumstances. The development will not suffer a shortage of parking spaces, or queueing stalls, therefore, no parking overflow on public streets is anticipated. No mitigation measures were proposed, as none was needed. * * * * * *
July 31, 2023
Ms. Mari Zamora
Development Associate
Skanska USA Commercial Development
633 W. 5th Street, 68th Floor
Los Angeles CA 90071
Subject: 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Commercial Development Project Automated Parking Analysis, Beverly Hills, California
Dear Ms. Zamora,
As authorized, we have conducted an analysis of the parking operations associated with your proposed commercial project, located on the north east corner of the intersection of Carson Road and Wilshire Boulevard, at 8633 Wilshire Boulevard, in the City of Beverly Hills, California. The proposed project (Project) consists of the demolition of an existing commercial building, and the development of a new three story 25,566 sf office building. The site currently is served by one driveway on Carson Road, which serves low density residential uses. Low to medium density commercial uses are found along Wilshire Boulevard.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed development will be supported by a 76-stall subterranean parking garage, located beneath the building. Access to the development’s parking garage will be provided by a 25 foot driveway located along the Carson Road frontage. At the present time, the parking facility is planned to utilize an automated parking system which will operate over two underground parking floors. The purpose of this analysis is to estimate the effectiveness of the proposed automated parking system in processing the Project’s arrival traffic volumes, parking demand, as well as to estimate the length of queues potentially created at the garage’s access point. Based upon the preliminary automated parking system layout, a total of four staging stalls will be provided for inbound vehicles waiting to enter the automated parking system, in addition to the two vehicles being processed in the system.

COCO TRAFFIC PLANNERS, INC.

TRAFFIC • DESIGN • PARKING • MODELING • URBAN PLANNING
10835 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 202 • Los Angeles, California 90025 • Ph/Fax: (310) 470-4870 • E-mail: [email protected] .

TRAFFIC GENERATION
As indicated in the Traffic Study our firm prepared on January 27, 2020, the Project’s quantity of traffic generated was obtained with traffic generation factors from the 10th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The General Office, Land Use Code 710, factors were applied to the Project for the daily, and the morning and evening peak periods. Based upon that, Table 1 shows in detail the generation factors used for analysis purposes as well as the related volumes. As shown in Table 1, the proposed development is expected to generate about 280 vehicle trips per day (140 inbound and 140 outbound), with an AM peak of 51 trips (44 inbound and 7 outbound), and a PM peak of 31 trips (5 inbound and 26 outbound). These volumes do not include any Transit Credit, or pass-by trips.

For the purpose of evaluating the Project’s traffic impacts, it was agreed with the City of Beverly Hills that only the following traffic allowance should be applied to the existing site development project: 1) a deduction of 5% of the total traffic generated by the existing development as Transit Credit, due to vicinity of Metro Rapid bus lines along Wilshire Boulevard, and 2) a 10% pass-by trip credit of the existing restaurant traffic.

Table 1 also shows the Project’s net traffic generation after the application of the above traffic generation credits.

As shown in Table 1, the proposed project is expected to actually reduce the surrounding street system traffic volumes by about 200 vehicle trips per day (100 inbound and 100 outbound). During the morning peak hour the project was estimated to add 46 vehicle trips (40 inbound and 6 outbound), and reduce the evening peak hour traffic by 12 vehicle trips (-24 inbound and 12 outbound). However, in order to estimate the proposed project’s Automated Parking System under a “worst case scenario”, no such reduction was used in the calculations performed in our analysis.

It should be noted that, based upon the City of Beverly Hills CEQA Transportation Thresholds, the proposed Project qualifies for an exemption from the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis. The applicable Screening Criteria exempt the Project because: a) it will add less than 110 daily vehicle trips to the surrounding street system; and b) the Project is located in a Transit Priority Area (TPA) commercial zone (defined as being within a ½ mile radius from a Metro Rapid bus stop), with bus line 720 running along Wilshire Boulevard. In addition, the subway Metro Purple Line is under construction, and will run under Wilshire Boulevard; c) the Project has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75; d) the project does not provide more parking than July 31, 2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Commercial Development Project
Automated Parking Analysis - Beverly Hills, California
- 2 -
TABLE 1

PROJECT TRAFFIC GENERATION
8621 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Traffic Impact Study - Beverly Hills

AVERAGE AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

L A N D U S E LAND DAILY TRAFFIC
SIZE UNIT USE Trip Ends (TE) TE Rate (1) Trip Ends (2) TE Rate (1) Trip Ends (2) CODE Rate (1) TE (2) In Out In Out In Out In Out
Site Proposed Project
General Office 25.566 KGSF 710 11.00 281 1.72 0.28 44 7 0.71 3.47 5 26 Proposed Project Traffic Generation (3) 281 AM Peak = 51 44 7 PM Peak = 31 5 26 Site Existing Development
Restaurant 6.787 KGFA 931 83.85 569 0.599 0.131 4 1 5.226 2.574 35 17 Existing Development Traffic Generation 569 AM Peak = 5 4 1 PM Peak = 52 35 17 Transit Credit (5 %) 6.787 KGLA 850 4.10 28 2.831 1.810 0 0 2.831 1.810 2 1 Pass-by Credit (10 %) 6.787 KGLA 850 8.40 57 2.831 1.810 0 0 2.831 1.810 4 2 Traffic Generation Volumes Credit 85 AM Peak = 0 0 0 PM Peak = 9 6 3 Existing Development Net Traffic Generation 484 AM Total = 5 4 1 PM Total = 43 29 14 Total Future Net Site Traffic Addition (203) AM Total = 46 40 6 PM Total = -12 (24) 12 Note: Traffic Generation factors per Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Traffic Generation Manual 10th Edition. 1) TE Rate is the average number of Trip Ends generated per "SIZE" Unit (i.e. DU).2) Trip End is a one-way vehicle movement entering or leaving the traffic generator. 3) Traffic volumes used in the analysis to evaluate the project's impact under a worst-case scenario. required by the City except for two parking stalls provided to complete the subterranean automated parking system; and e) as determined by the City of Beverly Hills, the Project is consistent with the applicable SCAG RTP/SCS. Consequently, the proposed Project is screened out of the CEQA vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis (per City thresholds), as well as the City’s local traffic assessment, since the proposed Project’s net peak hour trips generated will be less than 50.

AUTOMATED PARKING SYSTEM
The Project’s parking system, designed by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM Architects), will be automated by a parking system provided by Volley Automation. The operations of the system consist of a parker driving a car into one of the two proposed Parking Bays, after a Parking Bay Availability Indicator Light turns green, (which indicates that the Parking Bay is available for the next inbound transaction). The car loads directly onto a vehicle pallet (tray), so that the car can be carried around. In the Parking Bay the driver locks the car and walks to an electronic parking station, located outside the bay. At the station the driver picks up a ticket, or slides a card, for later payment of the parking fees, and retrieval of the car, and walks away. In the meantime, the vehicle and the tray are engaged by an AGV (automated guided vehicle), while a lift brings car, tray, and AGV, down to the first, or second, underground parking floor. Once at the parking floor the AGV carries the tray out of the lift, and to its designated parking stall. In order to retrieve his/her car, patrons return to the parking station and insert the ticket/card into it, which triggers the car retrieval process. Specifically, an AGV travels to the tray holding the car requested, and carries it back to the lift, which delivers the car to the ground floor. At that point, the parking bay door opens up, and the parker can pick it up.

It should be noted that the car is delivered facing the parking bay exit, which expedites the exiting operation. The cycle times represent the time between the Parking Bay being ready to store an inbound vehicle, and it being ready to receive the next vehicle.

As indicated above, the Project’s automated system currently is planned to have two Parking Bays, one of which is designed with ADA standards, van accessible. If needed, a parking attendant could be available during peak periods in order to facilitate, and expedite the staging of vehicles.

Preliminary data, reported by Mr. Lance Beeny, of Volley Automation, provided the estimated cycle times for inbound and outbound traffic, for the following operations:

July 31, 2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Commercial Development Project
Automated Parking Analysis - Beverly Hills, California
- 3 -
Store Inbound Vehicle on B1, Bring Empty Tray to Ground Floor 73.8 sec Store Inbound Vehicle on B2, Bring Empty Tray to Ground Floor 83.8 sec Store Inbound Vehicle on B1, Bring Outbound Vehicle to Ground Floor 82.8 sec Store Inbound Vehicle on B2, Bring Outbound Vehicle to Ground Floor 92.8 sec As reported by Mr. Beeny, while the assumptions associated with the above cycle times are matched by the System components during normal operations, they include some delays, and speed limitations to account for the fact that not every cycle runs with perfect timing, even if most do. Consequently, those cycle times reportedly are fairly conservative.

Table 2 provides a more detailed evaluation of the inbound and outbound vehicle processing times. Specifically, for the purpose of refining the evaluation of the System’s cycle times, these were broken down by the sequence of the operations identified earlier. The first group of operations, indicated as “dwell time”, relates to those operations where the driver is directly involved with the process; the second, “machine time”, relates to the operations performed by the system, without human intervention.

It should be noted that the data reported in Table 2, concerning inbound and outbound patron dwell times, relate to average conditions, where patrons may not be familiar with the system’s operations. Consequently, the dwell times reported are fairly conservative for an office environment, where peak hour patrons normally are office workers, familiar with the System. In addition the proposed parking automated system provides two Parking Bays in close proximity to each other, which makes its use more efficient.

As indicated in Table 2, the cycle time for inbound vehicles, stored to parking floor B1 was estimated at 99 seconds, while 109 seconds would be needed to store a vehicle to the lower parking floor B2. Similarly, the cycle time for outbound vehicles, delivered from parking floor B1 was estimated at 82 seconds, while 92 seconds would be needed to bring up a vehicle from the parking floor B2. Our estimates for the inbound movements are significantly more conservative than those reported earlier, as the inbound cycle is critical to the entire system, and is more susceptible to impacting the system’s potential vehicular queues.

It should be noted that the cycle times reported in Table 2 include all the times associated with the automated system full cycle, as defined earlier. Specifically, the July 31, 2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Commercial Development Project
Automated Parking Analysis - Beverly Hills, California
- 4 -
TABLE 2

AUTOMATED PARKING CYCLE TIME
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Automated Parking Analysis - Beverly Hills INBOUND STORAGE TIME (sec)
PARKING Dwell Time Machine Time
STALL Access EES & Locks Car / Driver Tray Travels to Tray Exits Lift & AGV Enters AGV Travels to Total LOCATION Loads on Host Door Down Takes Ticket Pkg Floor Travels to Pkg Stall Lift Ground Floor B1 13 15 15 12 22 10 12 99
(1)
B2 13 15 15 22 22 10 12 109
OUTBOUND TIME (sec)
PARKING Dwell Time Machine Time
STALL Driver Driver Car Exits AGV Travels to Tray Travels Back Tray Travels Tray Ready For Total LOCATION Pays Parking Retrives Car EES Pkg Stall & Loads Onto Lift To Ground Floor Next Car B1 12 15 8 12 23 12 - 82
(1)
B2 12 15 8 22 23 12 - 92
(1) = AGV's are rotated to B1 during down times, to make the system operate more efficiently. Note: EES = Entry/Exit Station; AGV = Automated Guided Vehicle; Host = Metal Platform to be Loaded with Vehicle; AGV = Automated Guided Vehicle; Tray = Combination of AGV, Vehicle, and Host; GF = Ground Floor; PF = Parking Floor; time between the Parking Bay being ready to store an inbound vehicle, and it being ready to receive the next vehicle. When the system is up and running, certain processes overlap with others, thus reducing the per vehicle time. Also, operations such as the opening and closing of the Parking Bays gates can be eliminated, if the next vehicle is ready to be stored. In order to evaluate the system’s cycle times at regimen, we evaluated those times with multiple vehicles ready to be stored. A Gantt chart is reported in Table 3, which shows the results of the analysis for three inbound vehicles.

As indicated, the first vehicle has a cycle time of 88 seconds for parking in B1, while the average with the second vehicle is 82 seconds, and about 80 seconds with the third vehicle. This shows that the system becomes more efficient as it becomes fully operational. Vehicles stored in B2 also show similar improvements, with the first vehicle showing a cycle time of 98 seconds, with an average of 87 seconds per vehicle with the second one, and an average of 84 seconds with the third vehicle. Similarly, Table 4 shows the same conditions, but for outbound vehicles.

AUTOMATED PARKING SYSTEM QUEUEING NEEDS
In order to calculate the number of queueing stalls needed to address the automated parking system operation under a worst case scenario, we analyzed the needs associated with the inbound movements without the optimal conditions described above, when the system is up and running, or at regimen. The morning peak hour typically has the highest inbound traffic volumes therefore is the critical condition analyzed. As indicated above, the Project has an AM peak hour of 51 trips, with 44 inbound and 7 outbound. The PM peak hour has a much lower traffic generation, with 31 trips, and only 5 inbound.

The Queue analysis conducted assumes a Poisson arrival rate of the 44 inbound, described by a “bell curve”, and the highest cycle times reported earlier in this report.

Based upon that, we performed the analysis under the “M/M/s Queueing Calculations”, the “M/M/s Finite Capacity Queueing Calculations”, and the “Finite Population Queueing Calculations”, which all address conditions which may occur per different types of queueing capacity. The calculation sheets are attached, and show that with a 95 percent “desired service level”, the proposed queueing length of four vehicles will easily satisfy the needs of the inbound Project vehicles, virtually under any circumstances that the Project will experience. The peak waiting time in the queue varies between about 50 and 86 seconds, depending on the analysis described above. The queue analysis calculation sheets are reported in Appendix A.

July 31, 2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Commercial Development Project
Automated Parking Analysis - Beverly Hills, California
- 5 -

PERIODS
1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145 150 155 160 165 170 175 180 185 190 195 200 205 210 215 220 225 230 235 240 245 250 255 Veh1 Enters EES
Loads on Host 1 13 13
Driver Locks Veh1
EES Door Down 14 15 29
AGV1 Loads
Veh1/Host (Tray1) 29 0 29
Driver Takes
Ticket / Pays 29 15 44
Tray1 Travels
to PF B1 44 12 56
Tray1 Exits
Lift On B1 56 10 66
Tray1 Travels to
Pkg Stall On B1 66 12 78
AGV2 Enters Lift -
Travels to GF * 66 22 88
Tray1 Travels From
GF to PF B2 44 22 66
Tray1 Exits
Lift On B2 66 10 76
Tray1 Travels to
Pkg Stall On B2 76 12 88
AGV2 Enters Lift -
Travels to GF * 76 22 98
Veh2 Enters EES
Loads on Host 78 13 91
Driver Locks Veh2
EES Door Down 91 15 106
AGV2 Loads
Veh2/Host (Tray2) 106 0 106
Driver Takes
Ticket / Pays 106 15 121
Tray2 Travels
to PF B1 121 12 133
Tray2 Exits
Lift On B1 133 10 143
Tray2 Travels to
Pkg Stall On B1 143 12 155
AGV3 Enters Lift -
Travels to GF * 143 22 165
Tray2 Travels From
GF to PF B2 121 22 143
Tray2 Exits
Lift On B2 143 10 153
Tray2 Travels to
Pkg Stall On B2 153 12 165
AGV3 Enters Lift -
Travels to GF * 153 22 175
Veh3 Enters EES
Loads on Host 155 13 168
Driver Locks Veh3
EES Door Down 168 15 183
AGV3 Loads
Veh3/Host (Tray3) 183 0 183
Driver Takes
Ticket / Pays 183 15 198
Tray3 Travels
to PF B1 198 12 210
Tray3 Exits
Lift On B1 210 10 220
Tray3 Travels to
Pkg Stall On B1 220 12 232
AGV4 Enters Lift -
Travels to GF * 220 22 242
Tray3 Travels From
GF to PF B2 198 22 220
Tray3 Exits
Lift On B2 220 10 230
Tray3 Travels to
Pkg Stall On B2 230 12 242
AGV4 Enters Lift -
Travels to GF * 230 22 252
* AGV's stay on Parking Floor until needed.

AUTOMATED PARKING CYCLE TIME - INBOUND OPERATIONS
Table 3
EES = Enter/Exit Station with Lift; Host = Metal Platform to be Loaded with Vehicle; AGV = Automated Guided Vehicle; PF = Parking Floor; Tray = Combination of AGV, Vehicle, and Host; GF = Ground Floor;

ACTIVITY

STARTING
TIME

DURATION

OF ACTIVITY
(SECONDS)

ELAPSED TIME
Vehicle 2 Cycle
Vehicle 1 Cycle
Veh 1 Parked in B1
88/98 seconds
78 seconds
AGV Inbound Cycle PF B1/B2
Vehicle 3 Cycle
Veh 1 Parked in B2
88 seconds
Veh 2 Parked in B1
165/175 seconds
155 seconds
AGV Inbound Cycle B1/B2
Veh 2 Parked in B2
165 seconds
Veh 3 Parked in B1
242/252 seconds
232 seconds
AGV Cycle B1/B2
Veh 3 Parked in B2
242 seconds

PERIODS
1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145 150 155 160 165 170 175 180 185 190 195 200 205 210 215 220 225 230 Driver Slides Card /
Pays For Parking 1 12 12
AGV1 Travels to &
Loads Veh1/Host 13 12 25
Tray1 Travels
to Lift 25 13 38
Tray1 Enters
Lift 38 10 48
Tray1 Travels
to GF From B1
48 12 60
Driver Retrieves
Car - Exits EES 60 23 83
Additional Time to
Travel From B2 83 10 93
Driver Slides Card /
Pays For Parking* 83 0 83
AGV2 Travels to &
Loads Veh2/Host 83 12 95
Tray2 Travels
to Lift 95 13 108
Tray2 Enters
Lift 108 10 118
Tray2 Travels
to GF From B1
118 12 130
Driver Retrieves
Car - Exits EES 130 23 153
Additional Time to
Travel From B2 153 10 163
Driver Slides Card /
Pays For Parking* 153 0 153
AGV3 Travels to &
Loads Veh2/Host 153 12 165
Tray3 Travels
to Lift 165 13 178
Tray3 Enters
Lift 178 10 188
Tray3 Travels
to GF From B1
188 12 200
Driver Retrieves
Car - Exits EES 200 23 223
Additional Time to
Travel From B2 223 10 233
* Operation performed during previous vehicle's operation.

AUTOMATED PARKING CYCLE TIME - OUTBOUND OPERATIONS
Table 4
EES = Enter/Exit Station with Lift; Host = Metal Platform to be Loaded with Vehicle; AGV = Automated Guided Vehicle; PF = Parking Floor; Tray = Combination of AGV, Vehicle, and Host; GF = Ground Floor;

ACTIVITY

STARTING
TIME

DURATION

OF ACTIVITY
(SECONDS)

ELAPSED TIME
Vehicle 2 Cycle
Vehicle 1 Cycle
Veh 1 Delivered From B1
83/93 seconds
After 60 seconds
AGV Outboud Cycle B1/B2
Vehicle 3 Cycle
Veh 2 Delivered From B1
After 130 seconds
Veh 2 Delivered From B2
After 140 seconds
Veh 1 Delivered From B2
After 70 seconds
153/163 seconds
AGV Outboud Cycle B1/B2
Veh 3 Delivered From B1
After 200 seconds
Veh 3 Delivered From B2
After 210 seconds
223/233 seconds
AGV Outboud Cycle B1/B2
These values reflect very efficient operations, with cycle times and waiting times that are relatively short, and are expected to be even better under normal conditions of full operation. The four vehicles queueing length will address the needs of the traffic generated by the Project’s proposed Automated Parking System, virtually under any circumstances, and no Project related traffic is expected to overflow onto public streets.

RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC IMPACT
We have conducted a localized residential traffic impact analysis of the subject development, which consists of evaluating the proposed project traffic impact upon the residential streets leading to the site. Specifically, we analyzed Carson Way between Wilshire Boulevard and Clifton Way. This section of Clifton Way is the one which project related vehicles will use when traveling to, and from the proposed site.

Automatic 24-hour machine traffic counts were conducted at our direction at two locations along Carson Way. Specifically, between Clifton Way and north of the parking driveway serving the 8641 Wilshire Boulevard office building (right across the proposed project’s parking driveway); the second count location was between Wilshire Boulevard and south of the above mentioned 8641 Wilshire parking driveway. The counts were conducted on Friday, August 23, 2019. The results of the machine counts are presented in Appendix B. The traffic volumes used in our analysis relate to the year 2024, which is considered as the build out year for the proposed development project.

The volumes were obtained by expanding the 2019 volumes counted, to the year 2024 with a one percent per year ambient traffic growth.

The residential impact analysis consists of comparing the total future estimated Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on a given section of a roadway, with the additional ADT associated with the proposed project. As indicated in Table 1, the proposed 8633 Wilshire Boulevard office building will add to Carson Way traffic the total of the 281 trips generated daily. Table 5 shows the results of the residential impact analysis.

The City of Beverly Hills has established thresholds for residential traffic, beyond which a project's impact is “significant”. These thresholds relate to the increase in ADT a project determines on a given roadway section. Specifically, the traffic impact is significant if: a) a project increases the ADT by 16 percent or more on a residential street that is projected to have a total future ADT of 2,000 or less vehicles; or b) the ADT increases by 12 percent or more on a street with a total ADT of less than 4,000 vehicles; or c) the ADT increases by 8 percent or more on a street with a total ADT of July 31, 2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Commercial Development Project
Automated Parking Analysis - Beverly Hills, California
- 6 -
TABLE 5

RESIDENTIAL IMAPCTS ANALYSIS
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Automated Parking Analysis - Beverly Hills Direction Allocation T R A F F I C V O L U M E S PROJECT IMPACT L O C A T I O N of of Site Site Street Time Type of
Traffic Traffic AM PM Daily AM PM Daily Period Ratio Impact Carson Road between Northbound 60.0% 4 3 84 30 60 513 AM 36.3% Clifton Way and the Southbound 75.0% 33 20 105 35 38 545 PM 19.0% 8641 Wilshire Bldg
Parking Driveway Average 67.5% 37 23 189 65 98 1,247 Daily 13.2% Not Significant Carson Road between Northbound 25.0% 11 1 56 49 58 627 AM 14.6% Proposed Project Southbound 40.0% 3 10 35 33 53 664 PM 9.0% Parking Driveway
and Wilshire Boulevard Average 32.5% 14 11 91 82 111 1,382 Daily 6.2% Not Significant The Thresholds of Significance enacted by the City of Beverly Hills establish that a project traffic impact is significant if its volumes constitute a share of:a) More than 16% of street volumes with up to 2,000 daily vehicle trips; or b) More than 12% of street volumes with up to 4,000 daily vehicle trips; or c) More than 8% of street volumes with up to 6,750 daily vehicle trips; or d) More than 6.25% of street volumes with more than 6,750 daily vehicle trips. less than 6,750 vehicles; or d) a project increases the ADT by 6.25 percent or more on a street with a total ADT of more than 6,750 vehicles.

Table 5 summarizes the results of the analysis, which show that the proposed project will not have any significant impact upon Carson Way, and consequently upon the surrounding residential street system. Carson Way is projected to have about 1,247, and 1,382 vehicles per day, at the northern and southern count locations respectively. * * * * * *
Please call me if you have any questions with regard to our study. It has been a pleasure to serve you on this most interesting project.

Respectfully submitted,
COCO TRAFFIC PLANNERS, INC.

Dr. Antonio S. Coco, P.E.

President
ASC/gt
#2K22010TS
July 31, 2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Commercial Development Project
Automated Parking Analysis - Beverly Hills, California
- 7 -

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

QUEUE ANALYSIS

CALCULATION SHEETS
Arrival Rate 44 per hour Number in system Probability
Service Rate 33.03 per hour 0 20%
Number of Servers 2 1 27%
Time Unit hour 2 18%
3 12%
4 8%
Utilization 67% 5 5%
P(0), probability that the system is
empty 20% 6 4%
Lq, expected number in queue 1.0626 7 2%
L, expected number in system 2.3948 8 2%
Wq, expected time in queue 0.0241 hours 9 1%
W, expected total time in system 0.0544 hours 10 1%
Probability that customer waits 53% 11 0%
12 0%
13 0%
Threshold time 0.1 hours 14 0%
Desired service level 93% 15 0%
16 0%
17 0%
Current service level 94% 18 0%
Number of servers required to
achieve desired service level 2 19 0%
20 0%
Total 100%
Advanced Parameters
Advanced Performance Measures
M/M/s Queueing Calculations - Inbound
Basic Performance Measures
Basic Parameters State Probabilities
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Probability
Number in system
Arrival Rate 44 per hour Number in system Probability
Service Rate 33.03 per hour 0 22%
Number of Servers 2 1 29%
Maximum queue length 4 2 19%
Time Unit hour 3 13%
4 8%
5 6%
Utilization 64% 6 4%
P(0), probability that the system is
empty 22% 7
Lq, expected number in queue 0.6171 8
L, expected number in system 1.8992 9
Wq, expected time in queue 0.0146 hours 10
W, expected total time in system 0.0449 hours 11
Probability that customer waits 50% 12
Probability that a customer balks 4% 13
14 15
Threshold time 0.1 hours 16
Desired service level 95% 17
18 19
Current service level 99% 20
Number of servers required to
achieve desired service level. 2 Total 100%
Number of servers required to
achieve desired service level. 2
Advanced Parameters
Advanced Performance Measures
M/M/s Finite Capacity Queueing Calculations - Inbound
Basic Performance Measures
Basic Parameters State Probabilities
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Probability
Number in system
Arrival Rate 44 customers per hour
Service Rate 33.03 per hour
Number of Servers 2 Number in system Probability
Population size 4 0 2%
Time Unit hour 1 13%
2 26%
3 35%
Utilization 91% 4 23%
P(0), probability that the system is
empty 2% 5
Lq, expected number in queue 0.8147 6
L, expected number in system 2.6342 7
Wq, expected time in queue 0.0136 hours 8
W, expected total time in system 0.0438 hours 9
Probability that customer waits 84% 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
Total 100%
Finite Population Queueing Calculations - Inbound
Basic Performance Measures
Basic Parameters
State Probabilities
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Probability
Number in system

APPENDIX B

AM - PM PEAK PERIOD TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND AUTOMATIC 24-HOUR MACHINE

TRAFFIC COUNT SHEETS
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 19-05494-002 Day:

City: Beverly Hills Date:

AM 34 59 16 0 AM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
PM 23 204 27 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0 1 0 0 0 22 0 20
2 984 0 1780
1 0 0 0 1 43 0 49
37 0 43 1 TEV 3191 0 3037 0 0 0 1
856 0 1461 2 PHF 0.94 0.96
69 0 55 0
0 0 1 0

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 0 37 90 48 PM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
AM 0 87 134 48 AM
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
302
Total Vehicles (PM) Total Vehicles (PM)
N Willaman Dr & Wilshire Blvd
Friday
08/23/2019

CONTROL

WESTBOUND
08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
Total Vehicles (NOON)
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Total Vehicles (NOON)
921

COUNT PERIODS
Total Vehicles (AM)

PEAK HOURS
Total Vehicles (AM)
NONE
05:00 PM - 06:00 PM
191
155
0 Signalized
Wilshire Blvd

EASTBOUND
N Willaman Dr
177
0 N Willaman Dr

SOUTHBOUND
04:00 PM - 06:00 PM

NORTHBOUND
1536
0 Wilshire Blvd
07:00 AM - 09:00 AM
NONE
1902 0 1044
AM NOON PM0
0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON
`

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 19-05494-001 Day:

City: Beverly Hills Date:

AM 3 13 5 0 AM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
PM 2 10 9 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0 1 0 0 0 9 0 6
1 107 0 202
1 0 0 0 0 14 0 24
3 0 36 0 TEV 398 0 561 0 0 0 0
96 0 292 1 PHF 0.87 0.90
11 0 14 0
0 0 1 0

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 0 10 19 39 PM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
AM 0 10 8 16 AM
Clifton Way
07:00 AM - 09:00 AM
NONE
216 0 119
N Carson Rd
48 0
N Carson Rd

SOUTHBOUND
04:00 PM - 06:00 PM

NORTHBOUND
340
0 PEAK HOURS
Total Vehicles (AM)
NONE
05:00 PM - 06:00 PM
17 64
0 4-Way Stop
Clifton Way

EASTBOUND
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
38 Total Vehicles (PM) Total Vehicles (PM)
N Carson Rd & Clifton Way
Friday
08/23/2019

CONTROL

WESTBOUND
08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
Total Vehicles (NOON)
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Total Vehicles (NOON)
117

COUNT PERIODS
Total Vehicles (AM)
AM NOON PM0
0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON
`

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM
Day: City: Beverly Hills
Date: Project #: CA19_5495_001

NB SB EB WB
597 632 0 0
AM Period NB SB EB WB NB SB EB WB
00:00 0 0 0 4 14 18
00:15 0 0 0 11 9 20
00:30 1 0 1 8 13 21
00:45 1 2 0 1 2 11 34 10 46 21 80
01:00 1 0 1 10 11 21
01:15 0 2 2 12 12 24
01:30 1 1 2 15 15 30
01:45 0 2 0 3 0 5 15 52 13 51 28 103
02:00 0 0 0 8 13 21
02:15 2 0 2 9 15 24
02:30 0 2 2 15 11 26
02:45 1 3 0 2 1 5 9 41 16 55 25 96
03:00 0 0 0 7 18 25
03:15 0 1 1 9 17 26
03:30 0 0 0 16 15 31
03:45 0 0 1 0 1 15 47 15 65 30 112
04:00 0 1 1 11 12 23
04:15 0 0 0 20 8 28
04:30 1 0 1 14 17 31
04:45 2 3 0 1 2 4 8 53 11 48 19 101
05:00 2 1 3 13 14 27
05:15 2 0 2 10 15 25
05:30 0 1 1 14 8 22
05:45 2 6 1 3 3 9 16 53 17 54 33 107
06:00 4 0 4 16 12 28
06:15 3 2 5 5 6 11
06:30 1 4 5 12 2 14
06:45 4 12 5 11 9 23 3 36 9 29 12 65
07:00 6 5 11 10 16 26
07:15 7 7 14 5 9 14
07:30 5 5 10 7 8 15
07:45 10 28 6 23 16 51 8 30 7 40 15 70
08:00 18 5 23 5 5 10
08:15 8 9 17 2 6 8
08:30 9 9 18 2 4 6
08:45 11 46 8 31 19 77 3 12 1 16 4 28
09:00 9 12 21 6 0 6
09:15 7 16 23 3 0 3
09:30 7 5 12 4 2 6
09:45 8 31 14 47 22 78 3 16 5 7 8 23
10:00 8 7 15 6 1 7
10:15 11 7 18 0 6 6
10:30 8 7 15 1 4 5
10:45 13 40 12 33 25 73 0 7 3 14 3 21
11:00 10 12 22 1 1 2
11:15 12 13 25 1 3 4
11:30 5 10 15 4 0 4
11:45 6 33 13 48 19 81 4 10 0 4 4 14
TOTALS 206 203 409 391 429 820
SPLIT % 50.4% 49.6% 33.3% 47.7% 52.3% 66.7%

NB SB EB WB
597 632 0 0
AM Peak Hour 08:00 11:15 10:30 15:30 14:45 15:00
AM Pk Volume 46 50 87 62 66 112
Pk Hr Factor 0.639 0.893 0.870 0.775 0.917 0.903
7 - 9 Volume 74 54 0 0 128 106 102 0 0 208
7 - 9 Peak Hour 08:00 08:00 08:00 16:15 16:30 17:00
7 - 9 Pk Volume 46 31 0 0 77 55 57 0 0 107
Pk Hr Factor 0.639 0.861 0.000 0.000 0.837 0.688 0.838 0.000 0.000 0.811 4 - 6 Peak Hour
4 - 6 Pk Volume
SPLIT %
TOTAL
Pk Hr Factor
PM Peak Hour
PM Pk Volume
Pk Hr Factor
4 - 6 Volume
20:45
TOTAL
23:45
TOTALS
Total
1,229

DAILY TOTALS
21:00
21:15
20:30

DAILY TOTALS
22:15
22:30
22:45
23:00
23:15
23:30
Carson Rd Bet. Wilshire Blvd & 8641 Wilshire Dwy
21:30
21:45
22:00
Total
1,229
19:30
19:45
20:00
20:15
18:00
18:15
18:30
18:45
19:00
19:15
16:45
17:00
17:15
Friday
17:30
17:45
15:15
15:30
15:45
16:00
16:15
16:30
14:00
14:15
14:30
8/23/2019
14:45
15:00

DAILY TOTALS
PM Period
VOLUME
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
13:15
13:30
13:45
12:00
12:15
12:30
12:45
13:00
Project #: CA19_5495_001 City: Beverly Hills
Location: Carson Rd Bet. Wilshire Blvd & 8641 Date: 8/23/2019 Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
0 10203040506070
00:00
01:00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
13:00
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00
Vehicles

NB SB EB WB
Day: City: Beverly Hills
Date: Project #: CA19_5495_002

NB SB EB WB
489 518 0 0
AM Period NB SB EB WB NB SB EB WB
00:00 0 0 0 7 9 16
00:15 0 0 0 14 6 20
00:30 1 0 1 6 11 17
00:45 1 2 0 1 2 5 32 10 36 15 68
01:00 2 0 2 6 10 16
01:15 0 2 2 4 7 11
01:30 1 1 2 10 11 21
01:45 0 3 0 3 0 6 9 29 12 40 21 69
02:00 0 0 0 11 10 21
02:15 1 0 1 6 13 19
02:30 0 1 1 8 11 19
02:45 1 2 0 1 1 3 8 33 12 46 20 79
03:00 0 0 0 4 12 16
03:15 0 1 1 7 11 18
03:30 0 0 0 15 13 28
03:45 0 0 1 0 1 10 36 11 47 21 83
04:00 0 1 1 11 8 19
04:15 0 0 0 20 4 24
04:30 0 0 0 13 15 28
04:45 1 1 0 1 1 2 9 53 8 35 17 88
05:00 2 1 3 15 9 24
05:15 1 0 1 9 10 19
05:30 1 1 2 14 3 17
05:45 0 4 0 2 0 6 17 55 15 37 32 92
06:00 2 0 2 17 10 27
06:15 2 3 5 7 6 13
06:30 1 4 5 14 4 18
06:45 5 10 5 12 10 22 3 41 10 30 13 71
07:00 1 2 3 11 15 26
07:15 5 8 13 4 6 10
07:30 4 6 10 6 7 13
07:45 5 15 5 21 10 36 7 28 7 35 14 63
08:00 9 6 15 4 5 9
08:15 4 10 14 2 5 7
08:30 7 10 17 2 4 6
08:45 8 28 7 33 15 61 3 11 1 15 4 26
09:00 6 13 19 6 0 6
09:15 4 12 16 3 0 3
09:30 10 4 14 4 1 5
09:45 5 25 13 42 18 67 4 17 5 6 9 23
10:00 5 9 14 6 1 7
10:15 8 5 13 1 8 9
10:30 7 6 13 2 1 3
10:45 5 25 7 27 12 52 0 9 3 13 3 22
11:00 5 7 12 1 1 2
11:15 9 10 19 1 3 4
11:30 3 6 9 5 0 5
11:45 3 20 8 31 11 51 3 10 0 4 3 14
TOTALS 135 174 309 354 344 698
SPLIT % 43.7% 56.3% 30.7% 50.7% 49.3% 69.3%

NB SB EB WB
489 518 0 0
AM Peak Hour 11:45 08:30 08:30 16:15 14:15 17:15
AM Pk Volume 30 42 67 57 48 95
Pk Hr Factor 0.536 0.808 0.882 0.713 0.923 0.742
7 - 9 Volume 43 54 0 0 97 108 72 0 0 180
7 - 9 Peak Hour 08:00 08:00 08:00 16:15 16:30 16:15
7 - 9 Pk Volume 28 33 0 0 61 57 42 0 0 93
Pk Hr Factor 0.778 0.825 0.000 0.000 0.897 0.713 0.700 0.000 0.000 0.830 4 - 6 Peak Hour
4 - 6 Pk Volume
SPLIT %
TOTAL
Pk Hr Factor
PM Peak Hour
PM Pk Volume
Pk Hr Factor
4 - 6 Volume
20:45
TOTAL
23:45
TOTALS
Total
1,007

DAILY TOTALS
21:00
21:15
20:30

DAILY TOTALS
22:15
22:30
22:45
23:00
23:15
23:30
Carson Rd Bet. 8641 Wilshire Dwy & Clifton Way
21:30
21:45
22:00
Total
1,007
19:30
19:45
20:00
20:15
18:00
18:15
18:30
18:45
19:00
19:15
16:45
17:00
17:15
Friday
17:30
17:45
15:15
15:30
15:45
16:00
16:15
16:30
14:00
14:15
14:30
8/23/2019
14:45
15:00

DAILY TOTALS
PM Period
VOLUME
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
13:15
13:30
13:45
12:00
12:15
12:30
12:45
13:00
Project #: CA19_5495_002 City: Beverly Hills
Location: Carson Rd Bet. 8641 Wilshire Dwy & Clifton Date: 8/23/2019 Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
0 102030405060
00:00
01:00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
13:00
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00
Vehicles

NB SB EB WB

APPENDIX B
Noise Memorandum
This page is intentionally left blank.

M E M O R A N D U M
To: Kristen Bogue, Michael Baker International
From: Eddie Torres, Michael Baker International
Zhe Chen, Michael Baker International
Date: July 17, 2023
Subject: 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Noise Technical Memorandum

PURPOSE
The purpose of this technical memorandum is to evaluate potential short- and long-term noise and groundborne vibration impacts resulting from the proposed 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project (project), located in the City of Beverly Hills (City), California.

PROJECT LOCATION
The City is roughly 5.7 square miles in the southwestern portion of Los Angeles County (County), approximately 8.5 miles northwest of Downtown Los Angeles; refer to Exhibit 1, Regional Vicinity.

Surrounding jurisdictions include the City of Los Angeles along all sides and the City of West Hollywood to the west.

The project site is located in the southeast corner of the City at 8633 Wilshire Boulevard. As shown on Exhibit 2, Site Vicinity, the site encompasses approximately 12,783 square feet of lot area bordered to the south by Wilshire Boulevard and to the west by North Carson Road. Surrounding land uses generally include single-family residential uses to the north and commercial uses to the east, south, and west.

Regional access to the site is provided via State Route 2 (SR-2; Santa Monica Boulevard), Interstate 10 (I10), State Route 187 (SR-187; Venice Boulevard), and Interstate 405 (I-405). Local access to the site is provided via Wilshire Boulevard and North Carson Road.

EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The project site is developed with one existing commercial building. The approximately 6,787 gross square feet commercial building was previously the Bru’s Wiffle (restaurant) and is currently vacant.1 1 “Gross” (square feet) is used to describe the total area of enclosed space measured from the exterior walls of a building, including unusable spaces (e.g., areas between walls, structural columns, or shafts); “net” (square feet) is used to describe the total area of enclosed space measured from the inside finished surface of surrounding walls that is available for furnishing, equipment, and personnel and excludes any unusable spaces. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 1
Regional Vicinity 02/2023 JN 187917

NOT TO SCALE

P A C I F I C

O C E A N
Pyramid
Lake
Lake
Piru
Castaic
Lake
ORANGE
COUNTY

VENTURA
COUNTY

LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
KERN
COUNTY
101
101
1 1
2 1
5 5
5 126
118 118
241
142
134
261
133
138
138
138
405
405
605
710
110
110
10 10
210
210
210
10 405
23 2
14 14
18 23
23 27
55 91
90 90
57 60
60 30
71 22
Upland
Pomona
Chino
Palmdale
Lancaster
Pasadena
Alhambra
Monterey
Park
Pico
Rivera
Downey
South
Gate
Compton
Carson
Hawthorne
Inglewood
Culver
City
Santa
Monica
Beverly
Hills
Sherman
Oaks
Van
Nuys
Hollywood
Bellflower
Lakewood
Arcadia
Monrovia Azuza
Claremont
San
Dimas
West
Covina
La Habra
Heights
Brea
Walnut
Covina Baldwin
Park
Whittier
La
Mirada
Burbank
Pacoima
Glendale
Los
Angeles
Torrance
San
Pedro
Long
Beach
Huntington
Beach
Newport
Beach
Santa
Ana
Costa
Mesa
Garden
Grove
Anaheim
Tustin
Orange
Fullerton
Yorba
Linda
Irvine
Lake
Forest
Fillmore Piru
Moorpark
Thousand
Oaks
Simi
Valley
Castaic
Gorman
Lebec
Santa
Clarita
Sylmar
Agoura Hills Woodland
Hills
Canoga
Park
Chatsworth
Westlake
Village
Calabasas
Malibu
Palos
Verdes
Estates
Redondo Beach
Manhattan Beach
El Segundo
Playa Del Rey
Project Site
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 2
Site Vicinity
Source: Google Earth Pro, May 2020

WILSHIRE BLVD CARSON RD

WILLAMAM DR

STANLEY DR
02/2023 JN 187917

NOT TO SCALE

PROJECT SITE
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 4
The existing building is one story (approximately 25 feet in height). An existing 18-space surface parking lot is situated at the rear of the building with ingress/egress provided via North Carson Road. The project site is currently designated Low Density General Commercial and zoned Commercial (C-3) with a Mixed Use Overlay Zone, allowing a 2.0 floor area ratio (FAR) and 45-foot maximum building height with an additional 15-foot permitted for rooftop uses.2,3
Surrounding uses adjacent to the project site include commercial and residential uses. The project site is located within walking distance of single-family homes and apartments, as well as offices, retail stores, restaurants, and other commercial businesses along Wilshire Boulevard.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project would involve demolishing the existing single-story commercial building and surface parking lot and constructing an approximately 32,811 gross square feet (25,566 net square feet) commercial building with three floors of office/retail space, a rooftop penthouse, and two levels of basement parking; refer to Exhibits 3a through 3g, Floor Plans. The roof top would feature a penthouse lunchroom (approximately 2,555 net square feet) and an outdoor terrace (approximately 5,237 net square feet) with canopy covered areas. The basement parking levels would encompass approximately 22,457 gross/net square feet (11,228.29 square feet per level) and accommodate 76 parking spaces (fully automated) with a bicycle rack room on the first basement level.

New facilities would include office and retail space on the ground floor and office space on the second and third floors. Ancillary facilities, such as an elevator lobby, elevators, stairs, and restrooms are also proposed. Additionally, the rooftop penthouse would have an employee-only dining area (no food service other than vending machines are proposed in this area). A paved terrace is proposed on the ground floor and outside patios are proposed on the second and third floor, as well as the rooftop penthouse. An atrium and courtyard that opens towards the sky and rooftop are also proposed near the entrance Pursuant to BHMC Sections 10-3-2726 and 10-3-3107(A)(1)(b), the proposed building would be constructed to a height of 45 feet, with an additional 15 feet for rooftop appurtenances, for a total structure height of 60 feet. Additionally, the proposed building would be constructed to the project boundary on all sides with the exception of a ten-foot setback (with a six-foot green space) along the northern boundary of the project site.

Access to the building and/or basement parking would be provided via a main pedestrian entrance along Wilshire Boulevard and a vehicular ingress/egress driveway along North Carson Road. Access to the truck loading area (on the ground floor) would also be provided via North Carson Road.

Project construction would occur over approximately 24 months, beginning in the fall of 2023.

Construction of the project would include the following phases: demolition, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. It is anticipated that the project would be completed and operational by September 2025.
2 City of Beverly Hills, General Plan Land Use Designations - City of Beverly Hills, January 25, 2022, https://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/1807037749744115284/Landuse_11x17_20220125.pdf, accessed February 2, 2023
3 City of Beverly Hills, Zoning Map – City of Beverly Hills, October 05, 2021, https://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/159992164172431006/Zoning_11_17_Final20211005.pdf, accessed February 2, 2023.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3a
Ground Floor
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
UP
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
A5.01
01 A5.02
03 A5.01
03 01
A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12
A5.02
01 6' - 0" ARCHITECTURAL CMU FENCE

PLANTER WALL
LID

BIOFILTRATION PLANTER
10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

REQUIRED & PROPOSED
3RD LEVEL SETBACK
01 24'-0"
A5.15
12'-8" 13'-0"
24'-0"
01 A5.25
11 A5.15

EXTERIOR
EGRESS
PATH
1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015
1016
1017
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1018
1019
8'-0" 9'-0" 8'-0"
ST - 101
ST - 102
ST - 103
107 108
109
111
104
106
105
2HR RATED CHAISE

FOR FUEL LINES
2HR RATED CHAISE

FOR FUEL LINES

FUEL CABINET

OFFICE SPACE
EX-1001 EX-1002 EX-1003
110
EX-1007 EX-1006
1001
1002
EX-1008

ELECTRICAL ROOM

SCE TRANSFORMER RM

LOADING - VAN ONLY
LOBBY

ELEVATOR ELEVATOR LOBBY
STAIR 1

OFFICE SPACE MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM
JC

ELEC ROOM
STAIR 2
PARKING BAY 1 PARKING BAY 2 - ADA

PARKING DRIVEWAY

EXHAUST SHAFT

SUPPLY SHAFT

TRASH ROOM
112
113
3'-0"
3'-0"
8'-0" 6'-0 1/2"
8'-2 3/8" 10'-0"
EX-1005
22'-9 1/2"
19'-0"
EX-1009
EX-1004
1003

ENTRY PEDESTAL, KONX
BOX MODEL #3200 SERIES
FEC
FEC
FE
FE
FE

ENTRY PEDESTAL

PHYSICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN

CIRCULATION PATH AND VEHICULAR
TRAFFIC PER CBC 11B-250.1
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

FLOOR PLAN -
LEVEL 01
A2.01
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 01 01
No.: Description: Date:
100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 11/19/2021
CUP REVIEW DRAWINGS 03/04/2022
CUP/ ZTA SET 06/10/2022
50% DD 06/24/2022
100% DD 07/29/2022

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3b
Second Floor
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
UP
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
A5.01
01 A5.02
03 A5.01
03 01
A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12
A5.02
01 10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

REQUIRED & PROPOSED
3RD LEVEL SETBACK
01 A5.15
11 A5.15
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015 2016 2017 2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
ST - 202 203
204
205
206 207

SMOKE CONTAINMENT

TO COMPLY WITH
ESR-1136 & ICC-ES AC 77
2HR RATED

ENCLOSURE FOR

FUEL LINES

OFFICE SPACE

ELEVATOR ELEVATOR LOBBY
STAIR 1

MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM

JC VESTIBULE

ELECTRICAL ROOM

MEP SHAFT ROOM
STAIR 2

EXTERIOR TERRACE
ST - 201
2023
EX-2001
FEC
FE
FE
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

FLOOR PLAN -
LEVEL 02
A2.02
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 02 01
No.: Description: Date:
100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 11/19/2021
CUP REVIEW DRAWINGS 03/04/2022
CUP/ ZTA SET 06/10/2022
50% DD 06/24/2022
100% DD 07/29/2022

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3c
Third Floor
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
A5.01
01 A5.02
03 A5.01
03 01
A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12
A5.02
01 10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

REQUIRED & PROPOSED
3RD LEVEL SETBACK
01 A5.15
11 A5.15
3001
3002
3003
3004
3005
3006
3009
3008
3007
3011 3012 3013 3014 3015
3016
3017
3018
3019
3020
3021 3022 3023 3024
3025
3026
3027
SIM
ST - 302 303
305
304 306 307

SMOKE CONTAINMENT

TO COMPLY WITH
ESR-1136 & ICC-ES AC 77
STAIR 2 MEP SHAFT

ELEC RM

MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM

OFFICE SPACE

ELEVATOR
STAIR 1

ELEVATOR LOBBBY

EXTERIOR TERRACE

EXTERIOR TERRACE
2HR RATED

ENCLOSURE FOR

FUEL LINES
JC
ST - 301
EX-3002
EX-3001
3028
3029
EX-3003
FE
FE
FEC
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

FLOOR PLAN -
LEVEL 03
A2.03
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 03 01
No.: Description: Date:
100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 11/19/2021
CUP REVIEW DRAWINGS 03/04/2022
CUP/ ZTA SET 06/10/2022
50% DD 06/24/2022
100% DD 07/29/2022

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3d
Penthouse
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C

PAINTED STEEL CANOPY,

EXTENT ABOVE
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
A5.01
01 A5.02
03 A5.01
03 01
A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12

PLANTER
A5.02
01 10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

REQUIRED & PROPOSED
3RD LEVEL SETBACK
01 A5.15
FUEL
TANK
CLEAR
3'-0" 3'-4"
13'-4"
11 A5.15
4001
4004 4003 4002
4005
4006
4007
4008
4009
4010
4011 4012 4013 4014 4015 4016 4017 4018 4019 4020 4021
ST - 402 405
406 407
404
408

VERTICAL LADDER FOR

HIGH ROOF ACCESS
2'-0"

SMOKE CONTAINMENT

TO COMPLY WITH
ESR-1136 & ICC-ES AC 77

INTERIOR LUNCHROOM

MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM

ELEVATOR CTRL RM

MEP SHAFT
STAIR 2
STAIR 1

EMERGENCY ELEC RM

ELEC RM

GENERATOR ROOM

ELEVATOR ELEVATOR LOBBY
JC

MECHANICAL ROOM

EXTERIOR TERRACE LUNCHROOM

PLANTER

PLANTER
EX-4001
EX-4002
EX-4006 EX-4007
ST - 401
409
4022 4023 4024 4025 4026
4027
4028
4029
4030
4031
4032
4033
4035 4034
EX-4003 EX-4005
EX-4004
FEC
FE
FE
FE
FE

DEDICATED OUTDOOR

AIR SUPPLY UNIT

EXHAUST

FAN EXHAUST
FAN

EXHAUST
FAN

CONDENSER
UNIT

CONDENSER
UNIT
2 Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

ROOF PLAN -
ROOF
A2.04
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
ROOF PLAN - ROOF 01
No.: Description: Date:
100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 11/19/2021
CUP REVIEW DRAWINGS 03/04/2022
CUP/ ZTA SET 06/10/2022
50% DD 06/24/2022
100% DD 07/29/2022

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3e
Roof
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
A5.01
01 A5.02
03 A5.01
03 01
A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"

ELEVATOR

OVERRUN
PV
PANELS

NOT IN SCOPE

PAINTED STEEL
CANOPY
A5.02
01 ROOF DECK BELOW
10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

REQUIRED & PROPOSED
3RD LEVEL SETBACK
01 A5.15
11 A5.15
6'-0"
6'-0"
6'-0" 6'-0"
6'-0"
6'-0"

VERTICAL LADDER FOR HIGH

ROOF ACCESS

CONTRASTING YELLOW SAFETY WARNING

STRIPE FUSED TO PVC ROOFING
(6' - 0" FROM EDGE OF LOW PARAPET)

PLANTER
BELOW

OPEN GRATING
GT-1

OPEN GRATING
GT-1
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

ROOF PLAN -

HIGH ROOF
A2.06
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
ROOF PLAN - HIGH ROOF 01
No.: Description: Date:

CUP/ ZTA SET 06/10/2022
50% DD 06/24/2022
100% DD 07/29/2022

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3f
First Level Basement
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
AREA

ROTATION
AREA

ROTATION
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
01 A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12

BELOW GRADE STRUCTURE

LANDSCAPE SET BACK
>8' BELOW GRADE
2'-0"
CLEAR
2'-8 3/4"

BACKFLOW PREVENTER
6'-0"
01 A5.15
FENCE

WITH GATE
FENCE

WITH GATE,

MOVABLE BETWEEN GRID B AND C
11 A5.15
BIKE

STORAGE
(10)
B104
ST - B102 ST - B101
B103
B105
B106
B107

SUPPLY SHAFT

EXHAUST SHAFT

PARKING STORAGE
STAIR 2
STAIR 1

ELEVATOR PIT MPOE ROOM

CIRCULATION

CIRCULATION
2HR RATED

ENCLOSURE FOR

FUEL LINES
9'-0"
19'-0"
9'-0"
19'-0"
FE FE
VRC
SHAFT
VRC
SHAFT
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

FLOOR PLAN -
LEVEL B1
A2.0B1
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL B1 01
No.: Description: Date:
100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 11/19/2021
CUP REVIEW DRAWINGS 03/04/2022
CUP/ ZTA SET 06/10/2022
50% DD 06/24/2022
100% DD 07/29/2022

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3g
Second Level Basement
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
VAN-EV
AREA

ROTATION
AREA

ROTATION
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
01 A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12
6'-0"

BELOW GRADE STRUCTURE

LANDSCAPE SET BACK
>8' BELOW GRADE
01 A5.15
FENCE

WITH GATE
11 A5.15

PERFORATED SCREEN

WITH ROLL-UP GATE
PER VOLLEY REQ.

ST - B202
B207
B206
ST - B201
B205
ST - B204 ST - B203

SUPPLY SHAFT

EXHAUST SHAFT
STAIR 2

MAINTENANCE BAY

STORAGE ROOM
STAIR 1

VESTIBULE

FUEL TANK ROOM

PARKING STORAGE
9'-0"
19'-0"
9'-0"
19'-0"
VRC
PIT
VRC
PIT

PIT DRAIN, TYP
RE: PLUMBING
FE FE
FE
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

FLOOR PLAN -
LEVEL B2
A2.0B2
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL B2 01
No.: Description: Date:
100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 11/19/2021
CUP REVIEW DRAWINGS 03/04/2022
CUP/ ZTA SET 06/10/2022
50% DD 06/24/2022
100% DD 07/29/2022

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

FUNDAMENTALS OF SOUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE
Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium such as air, and is characterized by both its amplitude and frequency (or pitch). The human ear does not hear all frequencies equally. In particular, the ear deemphasizes low and very high frequencies. To better approximate the sensitivity of human hearing, the A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) has been developed. Decibels are based on the logarithmic scale. The logarithmic scale compresses the wide range in sound pressure levels to a more usable range of numbers in a manner similar to the Richter scale used to measure earthquakes. In terms of human response to noise, a sound 10 dBA higher than another is perceived to be twice as loud and 20 dBA higher is perceived to be four times as loud, and so forth. Everyday sounds normally range from 30 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). On this scale, the human range of hearing extends from approximately 3 dBA to around 140 dBA.

Noise is generally defined as unwanted or excessive sound, which can vary in intensity by over one million times within the range of human hearing; therefore, a logarithmic scale, known as the decibel scale (dB), is used to quantify sound intensity. Noise can be generated by a number of sources, including mobile sources such as automobiles, trucks, and airplanes, and stationary sources such as construction sites, machinery, and industrial operations. Noise generated by mobile sources typically attenuates (is reduced) at a rate between 3 dBA and 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. The rate depends on the ground surface and the number or type of objects between the noise source and the receiver. Hard and flat surfaces, such as concrete or asphalt, have an attenuation rate of 3 dBA per doubling of distance. Soft surfaces, such as uneven or vegetated terrain, have an attenuation rate of about 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance.

Noise generated by stationary sources typically attenuates at a rate between 6 dBA and about 7.5 dBA per doubling of distance.

There are several metrics used to characterize community noise exposure, which fluctuate constantly over time. One such metric, the equivalent sound level (Leq), represents a constant sound that, over the specified period, has the same sound energy as the time-varying sound. Noise exposure over a longer period is often evaluated based on the Day-Night Sound Level (Ldn). This is a measure of 24-hour noise levels that incorporates a 10-dBA penalty for sounds occurring between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The penalty is intended to reflect the increased human sensitivity to noises occurring during nighttime hours, particularly at times when people are sleeping and there are lower ambient noise conditions. Typical Ldn noise levels for light and medium density residential areas range from 55 dBA to 65 dBA. Similarly, Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a measure of 24-hour noise levels that incorporates a 5-dBA penalty for sounds occurring between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. and a 10-dBA penalty for sounds occurring between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively. Noise levels described by Ldn and CNEL are similar and usually do not differ by more than 1 dBA. Additionally, the Lmax, or maximum sound level, describes the highest sound level at a single event in which the sound level changes value as time goes on. Although Lmax is important in evaluating an interference caused by a single noise event, Lmax could not be totaled into a one-hour or a 24-hour cumulative measure of impact.

FUNDAMENTALS OF ENVIRONMENTAL GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION
Sources of earth-borne vibrations include natural phenomena (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides, etc.) or man-made causes (explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction equipment, etc.). Vibration sources may be continuous (e.g., factory machinery) or transient (e.g., 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 7
explosions). Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves with an average motion of zero. Several different methods are typically used to quantify vibration amplitude. One is the peak particle velocity (PPV); another is the root mean square (RMS) velocity. The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave. The RMS velocity is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the signal. The PPV and RMS vibration velocity amplitudes are used to evaluate human response to vibration.

Table 1, Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibration Levels, displays the reactions of people and the effects on buildings produced by continuous vibration levels. The annoyance levels shown in the table should be interpreted with care since vibration may be found to be annoying at much lower levels than those listed, depending on the level of activity or the sensitivity of the individual. To sensitive individuals, vibrations approaching the threshold of perception can be annoying. Low-level vibrations frequently cause irritating secondary vibration, such as a slight rattling of windows, doors, or stacked dishes. The rattling sound can give rise to exaggerated vibration complaints, even though there is very little risk of actual structural damage.

Table 1
Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibration Levels Peak Particle
Velocity
(inches/second)
Approximate
Vibration Velocity
Level (VdB)
Human Reaction Effect on Buildings

0.006–0.019 64–74 Range of threshold of perception.

Vibrations unlikely to cause damage
of any type.

0.08 87 Vibrations readily perceptible.

Recommended upper level to which
ruins and ancient monuments should
be subjected.

0.1 92
Level at which continuous vibrations may
begin to annoy people, particularly those
involved in vibration sensitive activities.

Virtually no risk of architectural
damage to normal buildings.

0.2 94 Vibrations may begin to annoy people in
buildings.

Threshold at which there is a risk of
architectural damage to normal
dwellings.

0.4–0.6 98–104
Vibrations considered unpleasant by
people subjected to continuous vibrations
and unacceptable to some people
walking on bridges.

Architectural damage and possibly
minor structural damage.

Source: California Department of Transportation, Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations, 2002.

Ground vibration can be a concern in instances where buildings shake and substantial rumblings occur.

However, it is unusual for vibration from typical urban sources such as buses and heavy trucks to be perceptible. Common sources for groundborne vibration are planes, trains, and construction activities such as earth-moving which requires the use of heavy-duty earth moving equipment. For the purposes of this analysis, a PPV descriptor with units of inches per section (in/sec) is used to evaluate constructiongenerated vibration for building damage and human complaints. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 8

EXISTING NOISE SETTING
Noise Sensitive Receptors
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses where noise exposure could result in health-related risks to individuals, as well as places where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels. Additional land uses such as parks, historic sites, cemeteries, and recreation areas are considered sensitive to increases in exterior noise levels. Schools, churches, hotels, libraries, and other places where low interior noise levels are essential are also considered noise-sensitive land uses. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a single-family residence located approximately 12 feet to the north of the project boundary.

Existing Stationary Noise Levels
The primary sources of stationary noise in the project vicinity are urban-related activities (i.e., mechanical equipment, parking areas, and pedestrians). The noise associated with these sources may represent a single-event noise occurrence, short-term, or long-term/continuous noise.

Existing Ambient Noise Levels
On March 19, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom passed Executive Order N-33-20 in response to the growing spread of COVID-19.4 Executive Order N-33-30 requires that all individuals living in the State of California shall stay at home or at their place of residence, except as needed to maintain continuity of the operations of the Federal critical infrastructure. As such, on-site noise measurements while Executive Order N-33-20 is active would not correctly reflect the ambient noise level near the project site. Thus, in order to assess the ambient noise levels, the existing ambient noise levels from mobile sources were modeled using the Federal Highway Administration’s Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108).

The RD-77-108 model calculates the average noise level at specific locations based on traffic volumes, average speeds represented by the posted speed limit, roadway geometry, and site environmental conditions. The majority of vehicular traffic near the project site are along Wilshire Boulevard, which generates the majority of existing noise in the immediate project vicinity. Traffic volume along Wilshire Boulevard was collected by National Data and Surveying Services on April 18, 2019, and a 3 percent annual growth rate was applied to the volume to account for ambient growth in the area. The modeled results are shown in Table 2, Existing Ambient Noise Level. Refer to Appendix A, Noise Model Results for noise modeling assumptions and results. As shown in Table 2, existing ambient noise level from mobile sources in the vicinity of the site is approximately 62.8 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from roadway centerline. 4 COVID-19 stands for Coronavirus Disease 2019, a quickly spreading global viral infection that causes mild upper respiratory tract illnesses and in some cases death.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 9
Table 2
Existing Ambient Noise Level
Roadway Segment ADT
dBA CNEL @ 100
Feet from Roadway
Centerline
Distance from Roadway Centerline to: (Feet)
70 CNEL
Noise Contour
65 CNEL
Noise Contour
60 CNEL Noise
Contour
Wilshire Boulevard Between Robertson
Boulevard and La Cienega Boulevard 39,626 62.8 - 71 153 Notes: ADT = average daily traffic; dBA = A-weighted decibels; CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level, - = contour is located within the roadway right-of-way

1. ADT was collected in 2019. A 3% annual growth rate was applied to ADT value.

Source: Traffic volumes prepared by National Data and Surveying Services on April 18, 2019.

REGULATORY SETTING
State of California
California Noise Control Act of 1973
Sections 46000 through 46080 of the California Health and Safety Code, known as the California Noise Control Act, find that excessive noise is a serious hazard to public health and welfare and that exposure to certain levels of noise can result in physiological, psychological, and economic damage. The act also finds that there is a continuous and increasing bombardment of noise in urban, suburban, and rural areas.

The California Noise Control Act declares that the State of California has a responsibility to protect the health and welfare of its citizens by the control, prevention, and abatement of noise. It is the policy of the state to provide an environment for all Californians that is free from noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare.

California Noise Insulation Standards (CCR Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 2-35) In 1974, the California Commission on Housing and Community Development adopted noise insulation standards for multi-family residential buildings (Title 24, Part 2, California Code of Regulations). Title 24 establishes standards for interior room noise (attributable to outside noise sources). The regulations also specify that acoustical studies must be prepared whenever a multi-family residential building or structure is proposed to be located near an existing or adopted freeway route, expressway, parkway, major street, thoroughfare, rail line, rapid transit line, or industrial noise source, and where such noise source or sources create an exterior CNEL (or Ldn) of 60 dBA or greater. Such acoustical analysis must demonstrate that the residence has been designed to limit intruding noise to an interior CNEL (or Ldn) of at least 45 dBA.

City of Beverly Hills
Beverly Hills General Plan
The Noise Element (Noise Element) of the General Plan overarching objective is to ensure that Beverly Hills residents will be protected from excessive noise. The following goals and policies are applicable to the project:

Goal N 1: Land Use Conflicts: Minimize land use conflicts between various noise sources and other human activities.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 10
• Policy N 1.3: Limit hours of Commercial and Entertainment Operations. Limit hours of commercial and entertainment operations adjacent to residential neighborhoods and other noise-sensitive receptors in order to minimize exposure to excessive noise. (Imp. 1.3,2.1, 2.2) • Policy N 1.4: Limit Hours of Truck Deliveries. Limit the hours of truck deliveries to commercial uses abutting residential neighborhoods and other noise-sensitive receptors in order to minimize exposure to excessive noise, unless there is no feasible alternative or there are overriding transportation benefits by scheduling deliveries at other hours. (Imp. 1.3, 2.1,

2.2)
• Policy N 1.6: Construction. In Beverly Hills, it is against the law to operate equipment or perform any outside construction or repair work on any building, structure, pneumatic hammer, derrick, steam or electric hoist, or other construction type devices, between the hours of 6:00 p.m. of one day and 8:00 a.m. of the next day, or at any time on any public holiday so as to cause discomfort or annoyance in a residential zone, unless beforehand a permit therefore has been obtained. (N 2.2.4, pg N-2)
Goal N 4: Construction Noise: Minimize excessive construction-related noise. • Policy N 4.1: Enforce Hours of Construction Activity. Continue to enforce restrictions on hours of construction activity to minimize the impact of noise and vibration from trucks, heavy drilling equipment, and other heavy machinery on adjacent noise-sensitive receptors, particularly in and near residential areas. (Imp. 5.3)
The General Plan also includes noise standards for various land use categories in the City as show in Table 3, City of Beverly Hills Land Use Compatibility Matrix.

Table 3
City of Beverly Hills Land Use Compatibility Matrix
Land Use
Category
Community Noise Exposure (CNEL)
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential-Low Density, Single-Family, Duplex, Mobile
Homes 50 – 60 55 – 70 70 – 75 75 – 85
Residential – Multiple Family 50 – 65 60 – 70 70 – 75 70 – 85 Transient Lodging – Motel, Hotels 50 – 65 60 – 70 70 – 80 80 – 85 Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes 50 – 70 60 – 70 70 – 80 80 – 85 Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters NA 50 – 70 NA 65 – 85 Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports NA 50 – 75 NA 70 – 85 Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 50 – 70 NA 67.5 – 77.5 72.5 – 85 Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries 50 – 70 NA 70 – 80 80 – 85 Office Buildings, Business Commercial and Professional 50 – 75 67.5 – 77.5 75 – 85 NA Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture 50 – 75 70 – 80 75 – 85 NA CNEL = community noise equivalent level; NA = not applicable Sources: City of Beverly Hills, City of Beverly Hills General Plan, Appendix B: Land Use Noise Compatibility Guidelines, January 2010. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 11
Beverly Hills Noise Ordinance
The City’s Noise Ordinance, Title 5, Chapter 1, Noise Regulations, BHMC Section 5-1-102 through 5-1-210 contains the City’s noise standards and regulations. The following noise regulations would apply to the project:
5-1-102: Definitions
Emergency Work: Work made necessary to restore property to a safe condition following a public calamity or work required to protect persons or property from an imminent exposure to danger to the health and safety of the persons or property.
5-1-202: Machinery, Equipment, Fans, and Air Conditioning: It shall be unlawful for any person to operate any machinery, equipment, pump, fan, air conditioning apparatus, or similar mechanical device in any manner so as to create any noise which would cause the noise level at the property line of any property to exceed the ambient noise level by more than five (5) decibels based on a reference sound pressure of 0.0002 microbars, as measured in any octave band center frequency, in cycles per second, as follows: 63, 125, 250, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 4,000, and 8,000 and for the combined frequency bands (all pass). (Ord. 11-O-2613, eff. 10-31-2011)
5-1-205: Restrictions on Construction Activity: Nothing in this section shall restrict the performance of “emergency work” as that term is defined in section 5-1-102 of this chapter.

A. No person shall engage in construction, maintenance or repair work which requires a city permit between the hours of six o’clock (6:00) p.m. and eight o’clock (8:00) a.m. of any day, or at any time on a Sunday or public holiday unless such person has been issued an after hours construction permit issued pursuant to subsection C of this section. In addition, no person shall engage in such work within a residential zone, or within five hundred feet (500’) of a residential zone, at any time on a Saturday unless such person has been issued an after hours construction permit issued pursuant to subsection C of this section. For the purpose of this section, “public holiday” shall mean:

1. New Year’s Day.

2. Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

3. Presidents Day.

4. Memorial Day.

5. Independence Day.

6. Labor Day.

7. Yom Kippur.

8. Veterans Day.

9. Thanksgiving Day.

10. The Friday following Thanksgiving Day.

11. Christmas Day.

Nothing in this section shall restrict the performance of “emergency work” as that term is defined in section 5-1-102 of this chapter.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 12
B. No person employed for the purposes of construction, maintenance, or repair work which requires a city permit shall enter a site on which such work will be done prior to eight o’clock (8:00) a.m. Any violation of this subsection shall be deemed to be an infraction.

C. The city building official, after consultation with appropriate city officials, may issue an after hours construction permit authorizing work and/or entrance to a work site otherwise prohibited by this section if the city building official determines that the public interest will be served by such a permit. Situations in which the public interest may be served by the issuance of such an after hours construction permit includes, but are not limited to, construction near school grounds, and construction that may interfere with vehicular or pedestrian traffic in heavily traveled public rights of way.

D. Applications for an after hours construction permit issued pursuant to subsection C of this section shall be in writing and shall set forth how the public interest will be served by issuing the permit. An afterhours construction permit may be revoked or suspended by the city building official if the city building official determines that activity conducted pursuant to the permit detrimentally affects the public health, safety or welfare. (Ord. 11-O-2613, eff. 10-31- 2011)
5-1-209: Portable Gasoline Engine Powered Blowers: It shall be unlawful for any person within the city to use or operate any portable machine powered with a gasoline engine used to blow leaves, dirt, and other debris off sidewalks, driveways, lawns, or other surfaces. (Ord. 11-O-2613, eff. 10-31-2011)

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) THRESHOLDS
The environmental analysis in this memorandum is patterned after the Initial Study Checklist recommended by the CEQA Guidelines. The issues presented in the Initial Study Checklist have been utilized as thresholds of significance in this section. Accordingly, a project may have a significant adverse impact related to noise and vibration if it would do any of the following:
• Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies (refer to Impact NOI-1); • Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels (refer to Impact NOI2); and/or • For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels (refer to Impact NOI-3).

IMPACT ANALYSIS
NOI-1 Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 13
Less Than Significant Impact. The City’s General Plan Noise Element contains the City’s policies on noise.

The Noise Element is a comprehensive program to limit the exposure of the community to excessive noise levels. The Noise Element establishes guidelines for controlling both construction and operational noise in the City. For operational noise standards, the City identifies noise-sensitive land uses and noise sources with the intent of separating these uses. Noise-sensitive land uses are those that may be subject to stress and/or interference from excessive noise. Noise-sensitive land uses include public schools, hospitals, and institutional uses such as churches, museums, and private schools. Typically, residential uses are also considered noise-sensitive receptors. Industrial and commercial land uses are generally not considered sensitive to noise.

Construction Noise Impacts
Temporary increases in ambient noise levels as a result of the project would predominantly be associated with construction activities. Construction activities would occur over approximately 24 months and would include the following phases: demolition, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating.

Project construction would require concrete/industrial saws, excavators, rubber tired loaders, and skid steer loaders during demolition; bore/drill rigs, concrete/industrial saws, excavators, graders, tractors/loaders/backhoes, and skid steer loaders during grading; concrete/industrial saws, cranes, excavators,, rubber tired loaders, signal boards, tractors/loaders/backhoes, and other construction equipment during building construction; rollers, surfacing equipment, and tractors/loaders/backhoes during paving, and air compressors during architectural coatings. Typical noise levels generated by construction equipment are shown in Table 4, Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Construction Equipment.

Table 4
Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Construction Equipment Type of Equipment Acoustical Use Factor1 Lmax at 50 Feet (dBA) Lmax at 12 Feet (dBA) Concrete Saw 20 90 102
Crane 16 81 91
Concrete Mixer Truck 40 79 91
Excavator 40 79 93
General Industrial Equipment 50 85 97
Loader 40 78 91
Tractor 40 84 96
Water Truck 40 80 92
Note:

1. Acoustical Use Factor (percent): Estimates the fraction of time each piece of construction equipment is operating at full power (i.e., its loudest condition) during a construction operation.

Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA-HEP-05-054), January 2006.

As shown in Table 4, construction-generated noise levels would range from 91 dBA Lmax to 102 dBA Lmax at the nearest sensitive receptor approximately 12 feet from the project boundary. It should be noted that the noise levels identified in Table 4 are maximum sound levels (Lmax), which are the highest individual sound occurring at an individual time period. Although Lmax is important in evaluating an interference caused by a single noise event, Lmax could not be totaled into a one-hour or a 24-hour cumulative measure of impact as CNEL or Ldn could. Operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 14
one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings.

Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be due to random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). Noise generated from construction activities would only occur during the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and would not occur on a Saturday, Sunday, or public holiday, in compliance with Section 5-1-205 of the Municipal Code and would be exempt from the City’s noise standards. Additionally, as the project is located within 500 feet of residential zone, the project construction would not occur on Saturday. It should be noted that construction activities would be exempt form the City’s noise standards per Noise Ordinance Section 5-1-205 within the permitted hours. These permitted hours of construction are required in recognition that construction activities undertaken during daytime hours are a typical part of living in an urban environment and do not cause a significant disruption. Thus, a less than significant noise impact would result from construction activities.

Construction Trip Noise Impacts
Construction activities would also cause increased noise along access routes to and from the site due to movement of equipment and workers, as well as haul trips. According to the CalEEMod defaults, it is anticipated that project construction would generate a maximum of 65 hauling trips per day, 48 worker trips per day, and 5 vendor trips per day. As a result, mobile source noise would increase along access routes to and from the project site during construction. However, mobile traffic noise from construction trips would be temporary and would cease upon project completion.

According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), a doubling of traffic (100 percent increase) on a roadway would result in a perceptible increase in traffic noise levels (3 dBA).5 The project’s construction trips would not double existing traffic volumes and any increase in traffic noise levels would thus be imperceptible. Therefore, short-term haul truck noise impacts from construction traffic would be less than significant.

Long-Term Operational Noise Impacts
Off-Site Mobile Noise
Future development generated by the proposed project would result in a net negative in additional traffic on adjacent roadways, thereby decreasing vehicular noise in the vicinity of existing and proposed land uses. The most prominent source of mobile traffic noise in the project vicinity is along Wilshire Boulevard.

As shown in Table 2, the project site is located partially within the 65 dBA CNEL roadway noise contour zone along Wilshire Boulevard and the rest of the site is located within the 60 dBA CNEL roadway noise contour zone.

According to the 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Automated Parking Analysis Beverly Hills – California prepared by Coco Traffic Planners, Inc. (dated October 4, 2022), the proposed project would generate a maximum of 281 daily trips, including 51 a.m. peak hour trips and 31 p.m. peak hour trips. The proposed project would result in a net decrease in traffic generation as the existing development generates 484 average daily trips, resulting in a net decrease of 203 daily trips. As shown in Table 2, the 5 California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 15
existing average daily trips on Wilshire Boulevard was 39,626.6 As such, the proposed project would decrease the daily trips in the project vicinity by 0.5 percent. According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), a doubling of traffic (100 percent increase) on a roadway would result in a perceptible increase in traffic noise levels (3 dBA).7 As the project would decrease daily trips by 0.5 percent, it would not result in a perceptible increase traffic noise level. Thus, a less than significant impact would occur in this regard.

Stationary Noise
Stationary noise sources associated with the project would include the operation of mechanical equipment, parking lot activities, and outdoor gathering areas.

Mechanical Equipment Noise
Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) units would be installed on the penthouse floor of the proposed building. Typically, mechanical equipment noise is 55 dBA at 50 feet from the source.8 Based upon the Inverse Square Law, sound levels decrease by 6 dBA for each doubling of distance from the source.9 The nearest sensitive receptor/use to the project site is a single-family residence located approximately 12 feet to the north of the project site. The penthouse floor HVAC units would be located 20 feet from the northern boundary of the project site. The project proposes HVAC units on the northeast side of the rooftop penthouse level of the proposed structure (45 feet in height). As such, HVAC units could be located as close as 54 feet from the northern boundary. 10 As such, the HVAC units would be
approximately 50 feet from the nearest sensitive receptor and the noise level would be reduced to approximately 55 dBA without an enclosure or noise attenuation features, which would not exceed the City’s 60 dBA CNEL exterior noise compatibility standard for single-family residences. In addition, the HVAC units would be shielded by a 13-foot, 6-inch high wall, which would further attenuate operational noise from the HVAC units. Therefore, the proposed HVAC units would not generate noise levels in excess of 5 dBA over existing ambient noise level (62.8 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from Wilshire Boulevard roadway centerline as shown in Table 2) in the project vicinity in compliance with Section 5-1-202 (Machinery, Equipment, Fans, and Air Conditioning) of the City’s Noise Ordinance. An emergency generator would be installed. The generator would be enclosed in a room located on the southeast section of the proposed building, and therefore would not be audible to off-site sensitive receptors. In addition, the generator would only be used during emergencies, in which case would be exempt from the City’s noise standards.

Thus, the proposed project would not result in noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors from HVAC units, and stationary noise levels from the proposed HVAC units would comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant. 6 Traffic volumes prepared by National Data and Surveying Services on April 18, 2019. 7 California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013.
8 Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden, Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values, July 6, 2010.
9 Cyril M. Harris, Noise Control in Buildings, 1994.
10 The Pythagorean theorem allows individuals to calculate the actual distance between a starting point and a suspended object. In this case, the starting point would be the closest sensitive receptor located approximately 20 feet to the north (side a) of the HVAC unit. The suspended object would be the HVAC unit, located 53 feet up (side b). By plugging these values into the Pythagorean theorem equation, the hypotenuse (side c), or the distance between the HVAC unit and the sensitive receptor, would result (54 feet).
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 16
Parking Lot Noise
The proposed project would include two levels of basement parking with 76 parking spaces. Access to the basement parking would be provided via a vehicular ingress/egress driveway to the north of the proposed building along North Carson Road. Estimates of the maximum noise levels associated with the parking lot activities attributed to the project are presented in Table 5, Typical Noise Levels Generated by Parking Activities.

Table 5
Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Parking Activities
Noise Source Maximum Noise Levels at 50 Feet from Source Car door slamming 61 dBA Leq
Car starting 60 dBA Leq
Car idling 53 dBA Leq
Source: Kariel, H. G., Noise in Rural Recreational Environments, Canadian Acoustics 19(5), 3-10, 1991.

As shown in Table 5, parking lot activities can result in noise levels up to 61 dBA at a distance of 50 feet.

It is noted that parking lot noise are instantaneous noise levels compared to noise standards in the CNEL scale, which are averaged over time. As a result, actual noise levels over time resulting from parking lot activities would be far lower than what is identified in Table 5. The proposed automated system would require vehicles to be parked in designated parking bays on the ground level. The parked vehicles would be transported via vertical reciprocating conveyors into the two basement parking levels. From there, the fully automated guided vehicles system would guide the parked vehicles into the designated parking spots. Cars awaiting to park in the ground level parking bays would potentially idle and generate noise level of 53 dBA Leq at 50 feet as identified in Table 5. The parking bay would be located as close as 18 feet to the nearest sensitive receptors. The potential noise level to the nearest sensitive receptors would be 62 dBA. However, the parking bay would be located within the proposed building and a concrete masonry unit wall is proposed along the northern project boundary. The wall of the proposed building and proposed concrete wall would block the line-of-sight between the sensitive receptors and the noise source (i.e., car door slamming, engine of the vehicle idling on the access driveway). The proposed concrete wall would reduce the noise level associated level to at least 57 dBA.11 As a result, the noise level would be would not exceed the City’s 60 dBA CNEL exterior noise compatibility standard for single-family residences. It should also be noted that a parking driveway for accessing the subterranean automated parking system has been proposed at the northwest corner of the project site. Moderate vehicular traffic would be present at this location. Nonetheless, similar to parking lot noises, noise from usage of the access parking driveway would be partially masked by background noise from traffic. Therefore, parking garage noise associated with the project is not expected to exceed the City’s noise standards and would not introduce a new noise source compared to existing conditions. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
11 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide, January 2006.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 17
Outdoor Gathering Area Noise
As noted above, the project would include a balcony on the third floor adjacent to the abutting singlefamily residence, rooftop penthouse lunchroom, and an outdoor rooftop terrace with canopy covered areas. These areas have the potential to be accessed by groups of employees intermittently for various occasions. Noise generated by groups of people (i.e., crowds) is dependent on several factors including vocal effort, impulsiveness, and the random orientation of the crowd members. Crowd noise is estimated at 60 dBA at one meter (3.28 feet) away for raised normal speaking.12 This noise level would have a +5 dBA adjustment for the impulsiveness of the noise source, and a -3 dBA adjustment for the random orientation of the crowd members.13 Therefore, crowd noise would be approximately 62 dBA at one meter from the source (i.e., at the gathering plaza).

The balcony would be approximately 20 linear feet from the nearest sensitive receptor located to the north of the project site. Based on the Inverse Square Law, crowd noise would be reduced to approximately 46 dBA from the penthouse and terrace at the closest sensitive receptor, which would not exceed the City’s 60 dBA CNEL exterior noise compatibility standard for single-family residences. As such, the proposed outdoor terrace area would not generate noise levels that would exceed the City’s noise standards at the closest sensitive receptors. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required.

NOI-2 Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction can generate varying degrees of groundborne vibration, depending on the construction procedure and the construction equipment used. Operation of some heavy-duty construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in amplitude with distance from the source. The effect on buildings located in the vicinity of the construction site often varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and construction characteristics of the receiver building(s). The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibration at moderate levels, to slight damage at the highest levels. Groundborne vibrations from construction activities rarely reach levels that damage structures.

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published standard vibration velocities for construction equipment operations. The types of construction vibration impact include human annoyance and building damage. Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the threshold of human perception for extended periods of time. Building damage can be cosmetic or structural. For most commercial and industrial structures that are engineered concrete and masonry buildings, the FTA architectural damage criterion for continuous vibrations is 0.3 in/sec. For most residential structures that are non-engineered timber and masonry buildings, the FTA architectural damage criterion for continuous vibrations is 0.2 in/sec. Typical vibration produced by construction equipment is illustrated in Table 6, Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment.
12 M.J. Hayne, et al, Prediction of Crowd Noise, Acoustics, November 2006. 13 Ibid.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 18
Table 6
Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment
Equipment
Approximate peak particle
velocity at 25 feet
(inch/second)
Approximate peak particle
velocity at 12 feet
(inch/second)1
Loaded trucks 0.076 0.170
Small bulldozer 0.003 0.007
Jackhammer 0.035 0.079
Notes:

1. Calculated using the following formula:

PPV equip = PPVref x (25/D)1.1
where: PPV (equip) = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the equipment adjusted for the distance
PPV (ref) = the reference vibration level in in/sec from Table 7-4 of the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.

D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018. Table 7-4 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment.

As indicated in Table 6, based on the FTA data, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment operations range from 0.003 to 0.076 in/sec PPV at 25 feet and 0.007 to 0.170 in/sec PPV at 12 feet from the source of activity. The nearest commercial/industrial structure is a commercial building adjoining the project site to the east and the nearest residential structure is a single-family house located 12 feet from project site to the north. However, the project would not require pile driving activities and would not utilize heavy-duty construction equipment with noticeable vibration levels (e.g., vibratory rollers, large bulldozers, jackhammers, pile drivers, etc.) near off-site uses or nearby structures.

Furthermore, hauling trucks routes on-site would be directed away from northern or eastern boundaries of the project site where the off-site sensitive uses and structures are located. Therefore, construction activities would not be capable of exceeding the 0.3 in/sec PPV or 0.2 in/sec PPV significance threshold for vibration and a less than significant impact would occur in this regard.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.

NOI-3 For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels??
No Impact. The nearest public use airport to the project site is the Santa Monica Municipal Airport which lies approximately 5 miles to the southwest of the project site. This airport is open to the public for use and owned and operated by the Santa Monica. According to Exhibit 3-4, Year 2021 CNEL Contours Santa Monica Airport, of the City’s Calendar Year 2021 CNEL Contours Santa Monica Municipal Airport14, the project site is not located within the Santa Monica Municipal Airport CNEL contours. The project site is 14 Santa Monica Municipal Airport, 2021 CNEL Noise Contours, https://www.santamonica.gov/media/Public%20Works/Airport/noise%20reports/2021_CNEL_annual_report.pdf, accessed February 24, 2023.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 19
not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, no impact related to airport land use compatibility would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Noise Technical Memorandum 20

REFERENCES
Documents

1. California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013.

2. City of Beverly Hills, General Plan: Noise, January 12, 2010.

3. City of Beverly Hills, City Code: Title 5., Chapter 1, Article 2., Specific Noise Sources, 2011.

4. City of Santa Monica, Calendar Year 2021 CNEL Noise Contours Santa Monica Municipal Airport, April 2021.

5. Coco Traffic Planners, Inc., 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis Beverly Hills – California, October 4, 2022.

6. Cyril M. Harris, Noise Control in Buildings, 1994.

7. Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden, Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values, July 6, 2010.

8. Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA-HEP-05-054), January 2006.

9. Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018.

10. Kariel, H. G., Noise in Rural Recreational Environments, Canadian Acoustics 19(5), 3-10, 1991.

Websites / Programs

1. Google Earth, 2023.

2. Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108).

Appendix A
Noise Data

TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS AND NOISE CONTOURS
Project Number: 178069
Project Name: 8633 Wilshire Boulevard
Scenario: Existing
Background Information
Model Description: FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) with California Vehicle Noise (CALVENO) Emission Levels.

Source of Traffic Volumes: Traffic counts prepared by NDS/ATD on April 18, 2019 Community Noise Descriptor: Ldn: CNEL: X
Assumed 24-Hour Traffic Distribution: Day Evening Night Total ADT Volumes 77.50% 12.90% 9.60%
Medium-Duty Trucks 84.80% 4.90% 10.30%
Heavy-Duty Trucks 86.50% 2.70% 10.80%
Design Vehicle Mix Distance from Centerline of Roadway
Analysis Condition Median ADT1 Speed Alpha Medium Heavy CNEL at Distance to Contour Calc Roadway, Segment Lanes Width Volume (mph) Factor Trucks Trucks 100 Feet 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL Dist Wilshire Boulevard
Robertson Boulevard and La Cienega Boulevard 6 10 39,626 25 0.5 1.8% 0.7% 62.8 - 71 153 329 100 1 ADT was collected in 2019. A 3% annual growth rate was applied to ADT value. "-" = contour is located within the roadway right-of-way.

Michael Baker International Page 1

APPENDIX C
Air Quality Memorandum
This page is intentionally left blank.
5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500, Santa Ana, CA 92707
Office: 949.472.3505 | Fax: 949.472.8373

M E M O R A N D U M
To: Kristen Bogue, Michael Baker International
From: Eddie Torres, Michael Baker International
Date: March 3, 2023
Subject: 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Air Quality Technical Memorandum

PURPOSE
The purpose of this technical memorandum is to evaluate potential short- and long-term term air quality impacts resulting from the construction of the proposed 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project (project), located in the City of Beverly Hills (City), California.

Surrounding jurisdictions include the City of Los Angeles along all sides and the City of Hollywood to the west.

The project site is located in the southeast corner of the City at 8633 Wilshire Boulevard. As shown on Exhibit 2, Site Vicinity, the site encompasses approximately 12,783 square feet of lot area bordered to the south by Wilshire Boulevard, and to the west by North Carson Road. Surrounding land uses generally include single-family residential uses to the north and commercial uses to the east, south, and west.

EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The project site is developed with one existing commercial building. The approximately 6,787-gross square feet commercial building was previously the Bru’s Waffle (restaurant) and is currently vacant. 1 1 “Gross” (square feet) is used to describe the total area of enclosed space measured from the exterior walls of a building, including unusable spaces (e.g., areas between walls, structural columns, or shafts); “net” (square feet) is used to describe the total area of enclosed space measured from the inside finished surface of surrounding walls that is available for furnishing, equipment, and personnel and excludes any unusable spaces. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 1
Regional Vicinity 02/2023 JN 187917

NOT TO SCALE

P A C I F I C

O C E A N
Pyramid
Lake
Lake
Piru
Castaic
Lake
ORANGE
COUNTY

VENTURA
COUNTY

WILSHIRE BLVD CARSON RD

WILLAMAM DR

STANLEY DR
02/2023 JN 187917

NOT TO SCALE

PROJECT SITE
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 4
The existing building is one story (approximately 25 feet in height). An existing 18-space surface parking lot is situated at the rear of the building with ingress/egress provided via North Carson Road. The project site is currently designated Low Density General Commercial and zoned Commercial (C-3) with a Mixed Use Overlay Zone, allowing a 2.0 floor area ratio (FAR) and 45-foot maximum building height with an additional 15-foot permitted for rooftop uses.2,3
Surrounding uses adjacent to the project site include commercial and residential uses. The project site is located within walking distance of single-family homes and apartments in the area, as well as offices, retails, restaurants, and other commercial businesses along Wilshire Boulevard.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project would involve demolishing the existing single-story commercial building and surface parking lot and constructing an approximately 32,811-gross square foot (25,566-net square foot) commercial building with three floors of office/retail spaces, a penthouse/rooftop, and two levels of basement parking, refer to Exhibits 3a through 3g, Floor Plans. The roof top would feature a penthouse lunchroom (approximately 2,555 net square feet) and an outdoor terrace (approximately 5,237 net square feet) with canopy covered areas. The basement parking would encompass approximately 22,457 gross/net square feet (11228.29 square feet per level) and would accommodate 76 parking spaces (fully automated) with a bicycle rack room on the first basement level.

New facilities would include office and retail space on the first floor and office space on the second and third floors. Ancillary facilities, such as an elevator lobby, elevators, stairs, and restrooms are also proposed. Additionally, the rooftop penthouse would have an employee only dining area (no food service, other than vending machines are proposed in this area). A paved terrace is proposed on the ground floor and outside patios are proposed on the second and third floor, as well as the rooftop penthouse Pursuant to BHMC Sections 10-3-2726 and 10-3-3107(A)(1)(b), the proposed building would be constructed to a height of 45 feet, with an additional 15 feet for rooftop appurtenances, for a total structure height of 60 feet. Additionally, the proposed building would be constructed to the project boundary on all sides with the exception of a ten-foot setback (with a six-foot green space) along the northern boundary of the project site.

Project construction would occur over approximately 18 months, beginning in the fall of 2023.

Construction of the project would include the following phases: demolition, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. It is anticipated that the project would be completed and operational by September 2025.
2 City of Beverly Hills, General Plan Land Use Designations - City of Beverly Hills, January 25, 2022, https://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/1807037749744115284/Landuse_11x17_20220125.pdf, accessed February 2, 2023 3 City of Beverly Hills, Zoning Map – City of Beverly Hills, October 05, 2021, https://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/159992164172431006/Zoning_11_17_Final20211005.pdf, accessed February 2, 2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3a
Ground Floor
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

PLANTER WALL
LID

BIOFILTRATION PLANTER
10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

REQUIRED & PROPOSED
3RD LEVEL SETBACK
01 24'-0"
A5.15
12'-8" 13'-0"
24'-0"
01 A5.25
11 A5.15

EXTERIOR
EGRESS
PATH
1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015
1016
1017
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1018
1019
8'-0" 9'-0" 8'-0"
ST - 101
ST - 102
ST - 103
107 108
109
111
104
106
105
2HR RATED CHAISE

FOR FUEL LINES
2HR RATED CHAISE

FOR FUEL LINES

FUEL CABINET

OFFICE SPACE
EX-1001 EX-1002 EX-1003
110
EX-1007 EX-1006
1001
1002
EX-1008

ELECTRICAL ROOM

SCE TRANSFORMER RM

LOADING - VAN ONLY
LOBBY

ELEVATOR ELEVATOR LOBBY
STAIR 1

OFFICE SPACE MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM
JC

ELEC ROOM
STAIR 2
PARKING BAY 1 PARKING BAY 2 - ADA

PARKING DRIVEWAY

EXHAUST SHAFT

SUPPLY SHAFT

TRASH ROOM
112
113
3'-0"
3'-0"
8'-0" 6'-0 1/2"
8'-2 3/8" 10'-0"
EX-1005
22'-9 1/2"
19'-0"
EX-1009
EX-1004
1003

ENTRY PEDESTAL, KONX
BOX MODEL #3200 SERIES
FEC
FEC
FE
FE
FE

ENTRY PEDESTAL

PHYSICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN

CIRCULATION PATH AND VEHICULAR
TRAFFIC PER CBC 11B-250.1
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

REQUIRED & PROPOSED
3RD LEVEL SETBACK
01 A5.15
11 A5.15
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015 2016 2017 2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
ST - 202 203
204
205
206 207

SMOKE CONTAINMENT

TO COMPLY WITH
ESR-1136 & ICC-ES AC 77
2HR RATED

ENCLOSURE FOR

FUEL LINES

OFFICE SPACE

ELEVATOR ELEVATOR LOBBY
STAIR 1

MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM

JC VESTIBULE

ELECTRICAL ROOM

MEP SHAFT ROOM
STAIR 2

EXTERIOR TERRACE
ST - 201
2023
EX-2001
FEC
FE
FE
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3c
Third Floor
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
A5.01
01 A5.02
03 A5.01
03 01
A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12
A5.02
01 10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

SMOKE CONTAINMENT

TO COMPLY WITH
ESR-1136 & ICC-ES AC 77
STAIR 2 MEP SHAFT

ELEC RM

MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM

OFFICE SPACE

ELEVATOR
STAIR 1

ELEVATOR LOBBBY

EXTERIOR TERRACE

EXTERIOR TERRACE
2HR RATED

ENCLOSURE FOR

FUEL LINES
JC
ST - 301
EX-3002
EX-3001
3028
3029
EX-3003
FE
FE
FEC
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3d
Penthouse
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C

PAINTED STEEL CANOPY,

EXTENT ABOVE
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
A5.01
01 A5.02
03 A5.01
03 01
A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12

PLANTER
A5.02
01 10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

VERTICAL LADDER FOR

HIGH ROOF ACCESS
2'-0"

SMOKE CONTAINMENT

TO COMPLY WITH
ESR-1136 & ICC-ES AC 77

INTERIOR LUNCHROOM

MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM

ELEVATOR CTRL RM

MEP SHAFT
STAIR 2
STAIR 1

EMERGENCY ELEC RM

ELEC RM

GENERATOR ROOM

ELEVATOR ELEVATOR LOBBY
JC

MECHANICAL ROOM

EXTERIOR TERRACE LUNCHROOM

PLANTER

PLANTER
EX-4001
EX-4002
EX-4006 EX-4007
ST - 401
409
4022 4023 4024 4025 4026
4027
4028
4029
4030
4031
4032
4033
4035 4034
EX-4003 EX-4005
EX-4004
FEC
FE
FE
FE
FE

DEDICATED OUTDOOR

AIR SUPPLY UNIT

EXHAUST

FAN EXHAUST
FAN

EXHAUST
FAN

CONDENSER
UNIT

CONDENSER
UNIT
2 Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3e
Roof
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
A5.01
01 A5.02
03 A5.01
03 01
A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"

ELEVATOR

OVERRUN
PV
PANELS

NOT IN SCOPE

PAINTED STEEL
CANOPY
A5.02
01 ROOF DECK BELOW
10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

REQUIRED & PROPOSED
3RD LEVEL SETBACK
01 A5.15
11 A5.15
6'-0"
6'-0"
6'-0" 6'-0"
6'-0"
6'-0"

VERTICAL LADDER FOR HIGH

ROOF ACCESS

CONTRASTING YELLOW SAFETY WARNING

STRIPE FUSED TO PVC ROOFING
(6' - 0" FROM EDGE OF LOW PARAPET)

PLANTER
BELOW

OPEN GRATING
GT-1

OPEN GRATING
GT-1
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

ROOF PLAN -

HIGH ROOF
A2.06
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
ROOF PLAN - HIGH ROOF 01
No.: Description: Date:

CUP/ ZTA SET 06/10/2022
50% DD 06/24/2022
100% DD 07/29/2022

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3f
First Level Basement
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
AREA

ROTATION
AREA

ROTATION
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
01 A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12

BELOW GRADE STRUCTURE

LANDSCAPE SET BACK
>8' BELOW GRADE
2'-0"
CLEAR
2'-8 3/4"

BACKFLOW PREVENTER
6'-0"
01 A5.15
FENCE

WITH GATE
FENCE

WITH GATE,

MOVABLE BETWEEN GRID B AND C
11 A5.15
BIKE

STORAGE
(10)
B104
ST - B102 ST - B101
B103
B105
B106
B107

SUPPLY SHAFT

EXHAUST SHAFT

PARKING STORAGE
STAIR 2
STAIR 1

ELEVATOR PIT MPOE ROOM

CIRCULATION

CIRCULATION
2HR RATED

ENCLOSURE FOR

FUEL LINES
9'-0"
19'-0"
9'-0"
19'-0"
FE FE
VRC
SHAFT
VRC
SHAFT
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3g
Second Level Basement
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
VAN-EV
AREA

ROTATION
AREA

ROTATION
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
01 A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12
6'-0"

BELOW GRADE STRUCTURE

LANDSCAPE SET BACK
>8' BELOW GRADE
01 A5.15
FENCE

WITH GATE
11 A5.15

PERFORATED SCREEN

WITH ROLL-UP GATE
PER VOLLEY REQ.

ST - B202
B207
B206
ST - B201
B205
ST - B204 ST - B203

SUPPLY SHAFT

EXHAUST SHAFT
STAIR 2

MAINTENANCE BAY

STORAGE ROOM
STAIR 1

VESTIBULE

FUEL TANK ROOM

PARKING STORAGE
9'-0"
19'-0"
9'-0"
19'-0"
VRC
PIT
VRC
PIT

PIT DRAIN, TYP
RE: PLUMBING
FE FE
FE
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

REGULATORY SETTING
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Air Quality Thresholds
Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is an expert commenting agency on air quality within its jurisdiction or impacting its jurisdiction. Under the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), the SCAQMD has adopted Federal attainment plans for ozone (O3) and particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less (PM10). The SCAQMD reviews projects to ensure that they would not: (1) cause or contribute to any new violation of any air quality standard; (2) increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation of any air quality standard; or (3) delay timely attainment of any air quality standard or any required interim emission reductions or other milestones of any Federal attainment plan.

Table 1
South Coast Air Quality Management District Emissions Thresholds Phase Pollutant (lbs/day)
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Construction 75 100 550 150 150 55
Operational 55 55 550 150 150 55
ROG = reactive organic gases; NOX = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; SOX = sulfur oxides; PM10 = particulate matter up to 10 microns; PM2.5 = particulate matter up to 2.5 microns; lbs = pounds Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, November 1993.

Localized Significance Thresholds
Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards’ Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). The SCAQMD provided the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated July 2008) for guidance. The LST methodology assists lead agencies in analyzing localized impacts associated with project-specific level proposed projects. The SCAQMD provides the LST lookup tables for one-, two-, and five-acre projects emitting CO, nitrogen oxides (NOX), PM10, or particulate matter up to 2.5 microns (PM2.5). The LST methodology and associated mass rates are not designed to evaluate localized impacts from mobile sources traveling over the roadways. The SCAQMD recommends that any project over five acres should perform air quality dispersion modeling to assess impacts to nearby sensitive receptors.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 7
Cumulative Emissions Thresholds
The SCAQMD’s 2022 AQMP was prepared to accommodate growth, meet State and Federal air quality standards, and minimize the fiscal impact that pollution control measures have on the local economy.

According to the CEQA Air Quality Handbook, project-related emissions that fall below the established construction and operational thresholds should be considered less than significant unless there is pertinent information to the contrary. If a project exceeds these emission thresholds, the CEQA Air Quality Handbook states that the significance of a project’s contribution to cumulative impacts should be determined based on whether the rate of growth in average daily trips exceeds the rate of growth in population.

City of Beverly Hills
Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan
The Climate Change and Air Quality Element of the Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan (SCP)4 includes goals and polices related to air quality. The SCP was adopted on February 17, 2019. The following SCP goal, objective, and policies are applicable to the proposed project:

Goal 2: Combat climate change and improve air quality.
• Objective 2: Reduce and encourage the reduction of air emissions in City operations and Citywide. o Policy 2.2: Minimize mobile source emissions from on- and off-road (construction) vehicles. o Policy 2.3: Minimize stationary source air emissions. o Policy 2.4: Minimize particulate matter, both airborne photochemical precipitates and windborne dust.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) THRESHOLDS
The environmental analysis in this memorandum is patterned after the Initial Study Checklist recommended by the CEQA Guidelines, as amended. The issues presented in the Initial Study Checklist have been utilized as thresholds of significance in this section. Accordingly, a project may create a significant environmental impact if it causes one or more of the following to occur:
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan (refer to Impact AQ-1); • Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (refer to Impact AQ-2);
• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (refer to Impact AQ-3); and/or 4 City of Beverly Hills, Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan¸ February 17, 2009, http://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/24347783778629768/SustainableCityPlan.pdf, accessed February 27, 2023. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 8
• Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people (refer to Impact AQ-4).

IMPACT ANALYSIS
Impact AQ-1: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), which is bounded by the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto mountains to the north and east and by the Pacific Ocean to the south and west. The SCAQMD has jurisdiction in the Basin, which has a history of recorded air quality violations and is an area where both State and Federal ambient air quality standards are exceeded. Areas that meet ambient air quality standards are classified as attainment areas, while areas that do not meet these standards are classified as nonattainment areas. The air quality in the Riverside County portion of the Basin does not meet the ambient air quality standards for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 and is therefore classified as a nonattainment area for these pollutants. The SCAQMD is required, pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act, to reduce emissions of the air pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment.

In order to reduce emissions, the SCAQMD adopted the 2022 AQMP which establishes a program of rules and regulations directed at reducing air pollutant emissions and achieving State and Federal air quality standards. The 2022 AQMP is a regional and multi-agency effort including the SCAQMD, California Air Resources Board (CARB), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The 2022 AQMP pollutant control strategies are based on the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020-2045 RTP/SCS), updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories, and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. SCAG’s latest growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans. The SCAQMD considers projects that are consistent with the AQMP, which is intended to bring the Basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants, to also have less than significant cumulative impacts.

Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are defined by the following indicators:

Criterion 1:

Because reactive organic gasses (ROGs) are not a criteria pollutant, there is no ambient standard or localized threshold for ROGs. Due to the role ROGs play in O3 formation, it is classified as a precursor pollutant and only a regional emissions threshold has been established. b) Would the project cause or contribute to new air quality violations? As discussed below in Impacts AQ-2 and AQ-3, the proposed project would result in emissions that would be below the SCAQMD’s thresholds for regional and localized emissions. Therefore, the proposed project would not have the potential to cause or affect a violation of the ambient air quality standards.
c) Would the project delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP?
The proposed project would result in less than significant impacts regarding localized concentrations during project construction. As such, the proposed project would not delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or 2022 AQMP emissions reductions.

Criterion 2:

With respect to the second criterion for determining consistency with SCAQMD and SCAG air quality policies, it is important to recognize that air quality planning within the Basin focuses on attainment of ambient air quality standards at the earliest feasible date. Projections for achieving air quality goals are based on assumptions regarding population, housing, and growth trends. Thus, the SCAQMD’s second criterion for determining project consistency focuses on whether the proposed project exceeds the assumptions utilized in preparing the forecasts presented in the 2022 AQMP. Determining whether a project exceeds the assumptions reflected in the 2022 AQMP involves the evaluation of the three criteria outlined below. The following discussion provides an analysis of each of these criteria. a) Would the project be consistent with the population, housing, and employment growth projections utilized in the preparation of the AQMP?
A project is consistent with the 2022 AQMP in part if it is consistent with the population, housing, and employment assumptions that were used in the development of the 2022 AQMP. In the case of the 2022 AQMP, three sources of data form the basis for the projections of air pollutant emissions: the City of Beverly Hills General Plan (General Plan), SCAG’s regional growth forecast, and the SCAG RTP/SCS. The RTP/SCS also provides socioeconomic forecast projections of regional population growth.

The population, housing, and employment forecasts, which are adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council, are based on the local plans and policies applicable to the City. As the SCAQMD has incorporated these same projections into the 2022 AQMP, it can be concluded that the proposed project would be consistent with the projections.
b) Would the project implement all feasible air quality mitigation measures? The proposed project would not require mitigation and would result in less than significant air quality impacts; refer to Impacts AQ-2 and AQ-3. In addition, the project would comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, including Rule 403 that requires excessive fugitive dust emissions controlled by regular watering or other dust prevention measures and Rule 1113 that regulates the ROG content of paint. As such, the proposed project meets this AQMP consistency criterion.
c) Would the project delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP?
Land use planning strategies set forth in the 2022 AQMP are primarily based on the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. The project site is located within a quarter mile of access to public transportation (Metro Rapid Bus Stop for bus lines 20/720 and a future Metro Purple Line Subway Stop) and other destinations, including off-site residential, restaurants, and retail. Further, the project would provide bicycle parking spaces, electric vehicle charging stations, and vanpool/carpool parking spaces on-site to promote alternative transportation options. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the actions and strategies of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. In addition, as discussed above, the project would be consistent with the General Plan land use designation. As such, the proposed project meets this AQMP consistency criterion.

In conclusion, the determination of consistency with the 2022 AQMP is primarily concerned with the longterm influence of a project on air quality in the Basin. The proposed project would not result in a longterm impact on the region’s ability to meet state and federal air quality standards. Also, the proposed project would be consistent with the goals and policies of the 2022 AQMP for control of fugitive dust; refer to Impact Statement AQ-2. As discussed above, the proposed project’s long-term influence would also be consistent with the SCAQMD and SCAG’s goals and policies and is, therefore, considered consistent with the 2022 AQMP.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.

Impact AQ-2: Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard?
Less Than Significant Impact.

Short-Term Construction
The project involves construction activities associated with demolition, grading, construction, paving, and architectural coating applications. The project would be constructed over approximately 18 months, 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 11
beginning in the fall of 2023. Exhaust emission factors for typical diesel-powered heavy equipment are based on the California Emissions Estimator Model version 2022.1.1.5 (CalEEMod) program defaults.

Variables factored into estimating the total construction emissions include the level of activity, length of construction period, number of pieces and types of equipment in use, site characteristics, weather conditions, number of construction personnel, and the amount of materials to be transported on- or offsite. The analysis of daily construction emissions has been prepared using CalEEMod. Refer to Appendix A, Air Quality Emissions Data, for the CalEEMod outputs and results. Table 2, Short-Term Construction Emissions, presents the anticipated daily short-term construction emissions.

Table 2
Short-Term Construction Emissions
Emissions Source3 Pollutant (pounds/day)1
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Year 1
Construction Related Emissions2 2.45 28.40 25.00 0.06 2.66 1.43 Year 2
Construction Related Emissions2 9.23 26.10 24.20 0.06 2.52 1.33 Year 3
Construction Related Emissions2 1.17 10.50 14.50 0.03 0.69 0.49 Maximum Daily Emissions 2.45 28.40 25.00 0.06 2.66 1.43 SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Is Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes:

1. Emissions were calculated using CalEEMod, version 2022.1.1.5.

3. The project construction area is approximately 32,811 gross square feet.

Source: Refer to Appendix A, Air Quality Emissions Data, for detailed model input/output data.

Dust (larger than 10 microns) generated by such activities usually becomes more of a local nuisance than a serious health problem. Of particular health concern is the amount of PM10 (particulate matter smaller than 10 microns) generated as a part of fugitive dust emissions. PM10 poses a serious health hazard alone or in combination with other pollutants. PM2.5 is mostly produced by mechanical processes. These include 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 12
automobile tire wear, industrial processes such as cutting and grinding, and re-suspension of particles from the ground or road surfaces by wind and human activities such as construction or agriculture. PM2.5 is mostly derived from combustion sources, such as automobiles, trucks, and other vehicle exhaust, as well as from stationary sources. These particles are either directly emitted or are formed in the atmosphere from the combustion of gases such as NOX and sulfur oxides (SOX) combining with ammonia.

PM2.5 components from material in the earth’s crust, such as dust, are also present, with the amount varying in different locations.

Construction activities would comply with SCAQMD Rule 403, which requires that excessive fugitive dust emissions be controlled by regular watering or other dust prevention measures. Adherence to SCAQMD 403 would greatly reduce PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations. It should be noted that these reductions were applied in CalEEMod. As depicted in Table 2, total PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds during construction. Thus, construction-related air quality impacts would be less than significant.

Construction Equipment and Worker Vehicle Exhaust
Exhaust emissions (e.g., NOx and CO) from construction activities include emissions associated with the transport of machinery and supplies to and from the project site, emissions produced on-site as the equipment is used, and emissions from trucks transporting materials to/from the site. As presented in Table 2, construction equipment and worker vehicle exhaust emissions would be below the established SCAQMD thresholds. Therefore, air quality impacts from equipment and vehicle exhaust emission would be less than significant.

ROG Emissions
In addition to gaseous and particulate emissions, the application of asphalt and surface coatings creates reactive organic gas (ROG) emissions, which are O3 precursors. As required, all architectural coatings for the proposed project structures would comply with SCAQMD Regulation XI, Rule 1113 – Architectural Coating. Rule 1113 provides specifications on painting practices as well as regulates the ROG content of paint. ROG emissions associated with the proposed project would be less than significant; refer to Table

2. Total Daily Construction Emissions
In accordance with the SCAQMD Guidelines, CalEEMod was utilized to model construction emissions for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, and PM2.5. As indicated in Table 2, criteria pollutant emissions during construction of the proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds. Thus, total construction related air emissions would be less than significant.

Asbestos
Asbestos is a term used for several types of naturally occurring fibrous minerals that are a human health hazard when airborne. The most common type of asbestos is chrysotile, but other types such as tremolite and actinolite are also found in California. Asbestos is classified as a known human carcinogen by State, Federal, and international agencies and was identified as a toxic air contaminant by the CARB in 1986. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 13
Asbestos can be released from serpentinite and ultramafic rocks when the rock is broken or crushed. At the point of release, the asbestos fibers may become airborne, causing air quality and human health hazards. These rocks have been commonly used for unpaved gravel roads, landscaping, fill projects, and other improvement projects in some localities. Asbestos may be released to the atmosphere due to vehicular traffic on unpaved roads, during grading for development projects, and at quarry operations.

All of these activities may have the effect of releasing potentially harmful asbestos into the air. Natural weathering and erosion processes can act on asbestos bearing rock and make it easier for asbestos fibers to become airborne if such rock is disturbed. According to the Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California – Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos Report (August 2000), serpentinite and ultramafic rocks are not known to occur within the project area. Thus, there would be no impact in this regard.

Long-Term (Operational) Emissions
Mobile Source Emissions
Mobile sources are emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions.

Depending upon the pollutant being discussed, the potential air quality impact may be of either regional or local concern. For example, ROG, NOX, SOX, PM10, and PM2.5 are all pollutants of regional concern (NOX and ROG react with sunlight to form O3 [photochemical smog], and wind currents readily transport SOX, PM10, and PM2.5); however, CO tends to be a localized pollutant, dispersing rapidly at the source. Based on the 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis Beverly Hills – California (Automated Parking Analysis) developed by Coco Traffic Planners, Inc. (dated October 4, 2022)
5 , typical daily activities are forecast to generate 281 average daily trips, including 51 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 31 trips during the p.m. peak hour. However, the forecast of 281 daily trips would result in a net negative in trip generation. Currently, the existing development generates an average of 484 daily trips. The proposed project would reduce the current generation of daily trips to 281 daily trips, resulting in a net decrease of 203 daily trips. The CalEEMod modeled zero forecast traffic generation as a conservative analysis; refer to Table 3, Long-Term Operational Air Emissions. As shown in Table 3, emissions generated by vehicle traffic associated with the project would not exceed established SCAQMD thresholds. Impacts from mobile source air emissions would be less than significant. 5 Coco Traffic Planners, Inc., 8366 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis, October 4, 2022
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 14
Table 3
Long-Term Operational Air Emissions
Emissions Source Pollutant (lbs/day)1
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Proposed Project Summer Emissions
Area Source Emissions 0.47 0.01 1.43 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Energy Emissions 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mobile Emissions2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Stationary Sources5 13.20 36.90 33.60 0.06 1.94 1.94
Total Emissions4 13.67 36.91 35.03 0.06 1.94 1.94
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Is Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Proposed Project Winter Emissions
Area Source Emissions 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Emissions 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mobile Emissions2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Stationary Sources4 13.20 36.90 33.60 0.06 1.94 1.94
Total Emissions3 13.43 36.90 33.60 0.06 1.94 1.94
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Is Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes:

1. Emissions were calculated using CalEEMod, version 2022.1.1.5 and the California Air Resources Board, Emission FACtor (EMFAC 2021) web database.

2. The proposed project would result in a net negative trip generation over existing condition. As such, zero trip generation is modeled as a conservative analysis.

3. The numbers may be slightly off due to rounding.

4. Stationary sources of emission refer to the emergency generator for the project. As a conservative analysis, the project assumes the horsepower of the emergency generator would be 335 horsepower and running time would be 24 hours per year during emergency.

Source: Refer to Appendix A, for detailed model input/output data.

Area Source Emissions
Area source emissions would be generated from consumer products, architectural coating, and landscaping. As shown in Table 3, area source emissions from the proposed project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, or PM2.5.

Energy Source Emissions
Energy source emissions would be generated because of electricity usage associated with the proposed project. Based on information provided by project applicant, the project would not consume any natural gas on-site. The primary use of electricity by the project would be for space heating and cooling, water heating, ventilation, lighting, appliances, and electronics. Criteria air pollutant emissions from electricity use were not quantified since criteria pollutants emission occur at the site of power plant, which is offsite. Therefore, energy source emissions from electricity usage would be zero. As shown in Table 3, energy source emissions from the proposed project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, or PM2.5.

Stationary Source Emissions
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 15
Stationary source emissions would be generated from the proposed emergency generator on the rooftop.

As a conservative analysis, the analysis assumes the project would use the emergency generator with 335 horsepower for 24 hours per year. As shown in Table 3, stationary source emissions from the proposed project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, or PM2.5.

Air Quality Health Impacts
Adverse health effects induced by criteria pollutant emissions are highly dependent on a multitude of interconnected variables (e.g., cumulative concentrations, local meteorology and atmospheric conditions, and the number and character of exposed individual [e.g., age, gender]). In particular, ozone precursors VOCs and NOx affect air quality on a regional scale. Health effects related to ozone are therefore the product of emissions generated by numerous sources throughout a region. Existing models have limited sensitivity to small changes in criteria pollutant concentrations, and, as such, translating projectgenerated criteria pollutants to specific health effects or additional days of nonattainment would produce meaningless results. In other words, the project’s less than significant increases in regional air pollution from criteria air pollutants would have nominal or negligible impacts on human health.

As noted in the Brief of Amicus Curiae by the SCAQMD,
6 the SCAQMD acknowledged it would be extremely
difficult, if not impossible to quantify health impacts of criteria pollutants for various reasons including modeling limitations as well as where in the atmosphere air pollutants interact and form. Further, as noted in the Brief of Amicus Curiae by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), 7 SJVAPCD has acknowledged that currently available modeling tools are not equipped to provide a meaningful analysis of the correlation between an individual development project’s air emissions and specific human health impacts.

SCAQMD’s Brief of Amicus Curiae states that it would take a large amount of additional emissions to cause a modeled increase in ambient ozone levels over the entire region. The SCAQMD states that based on their own modeling in the SCAQMD’s 2012 Air Quality Management Plan, a reduction of 432 tons (864,000 pounds) per day of NOX and a reduction of 187 tons (374,000 pounds) per day of VOCs would reduce ozone levels at highest monitored site by only nine parts per billion. As such, the SCAQMD concludes that it is not currently possible to accurately quantify ozone-related health impacts caused by NOX or VOC emissions from relatively small projects (defined as projects with regional scope) due to photochemistry and regional model limitations. As such, for the purpose of this analysis, since the project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for construction and operational air emissions, the project would have a less than significant impact for air quality health impacts as well.

Cumulative Conclusion
6 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Application of the South Coast Air Quality Management District for Leave to File Brief of Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Party and Brief of Amicus Curiae. In the Supreme Court of California.

Sierra Club, Revive the San Joaquin, and League of Women Voters of Fresno v. County of Fresno, 2014. 7 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Application for Leave to File Brief of Amicus Curiae Brief of San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District in Support of Defendant and Respondent, County of Fresno and Real Party In Interest and Respondent, Friant Ranch, L.P. In the Supreme Court of California. Sierra Club, Revive the San Joaquin, and League of Women Voters of Fresno v. County of Fresno, 2014.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 16
With respect to the proposed project’s construction-related air quality emissions and cumulative Basinwide conditions, the SCAQMD has developed strategies to reduce criteria pollutant emissions outlined in the 2022 AQMP pursuant to FCAA mandates. As such, the proposed project would comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements and the adopted 2022 AQMP emissions control measures. Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with the best available control measures in order to reduce dust so that it does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the proposed project. Per SCAQMD rules and mandates, as well as the CEQA requirement that significant impacts be mitigated to the extent feasible, these same requirements (i.e., Rule 403 compliance, the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, and compliance with adopted 2022 AQMP emissions control measures) would also be imposed on construction projects throughout the Basin, which would include related projects.

As indicated in Table 2 and Table 3, the proposed project would not result in short- or long-term air quality impacts, as emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD adopted construction or operational thresholds.

Additionally, adherence to SCAQMD rules and regulations would alleviate potential impacts related to cumulative conditions on a project-by-project basis. Emission reduction technology, strategies, and plans are constantly being developed. As a result, the proposed project would not contribute a cumulatively considerable net increase of any nonattainment criteria pollutant. Therefore, the project’s incremental operational impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable and impacts in this regard are less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.

Impact AQ-3: Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses. Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. CARB has identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis.

The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a single-family residence located approximately 12 feet to the north of the project boundary. In order to identify impacts to sensitive receptors, the SCAQMD recommends addressing localized significance thresholds (LSTs) for construction and operations impacts (area sources only). The CO hotspot analysis, following the LST analysis, addresses localized mobile source impacts.

Localized Significance Thresholds
Local Significance Thresholds (LSTs) were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards’ Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). The SCAQMD provided the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]) for guidance. The LST methodology assists lead agencies in analyzing localized air quality impacts. The SCAQMD provides the LST screening lookup tables for projects that disturb/grade one, two, or five acres per day emitting CO, NOX, PM2.5, or PM10. The LST methodology and associated mass rates are not designed to evaluate localized impacts from mobile sources traveling over the roadways. The SCAQMD recommends that any project over five acres in size 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 17
should perform air quality dispersion modeling to assess impacts to nearby sensitive receptors from area source emissions. For LST analysis purposes, SCAQMD is divided into 38 SRAs, each of which contain specific localized air quality emission thresholds for CO, NOX, PM2.5, and PM10 to determine local air quality impacts. The project is located in SRA 2 (Northwest Coastal LA County).

Construction
The SCAQMD guidance on applying CalEEMod to LSTs specifies the number of acres a particular piece of equipment would likely disturb per day.8 SCAQMD provides LST thresholds for one-, two-, and five-acre site disturbance areas; SCAQMD does not provide LST thresholds for projects over five acres. The project would actively disturb approximately half acre per day during the grading phase of construction.

Therefore, the LST thresholds for one acre were conservatively utilized for the construction LST analysis.

The closest sensitive receptor is a single-family residence located approximately 12 feet to the north of the project boundary. These sensitive land uses may be potentially affected by air pollutant emissions generated during on-site construction activities. LST thresholds are provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters. According to SCAQMD LST Methodology, projects with boundaries located closer than 25 meters to the nearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters. As the nearest sensitive receptor is located approximately 12 feet from the planned construction area, the LST values for 25 meters (164 feet) were used.

Table 5, Localized Significance of Construction Emissions, shows the localized construction-related emissions. It is noted that the localized emissions presented in Table 5 are less than those in Table 2 because localized emissions include only on-site emissions (i.e., from construction equipment and fugitive dust), and do not include off-site emissions (i.e., from worker, vendor, and hauling trips). As seen in Table 5, emissions would not exceed the LSTs for SRA 2. Construction LST impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
8 The number of acres represent the total acres traversed by grading equipment. In order to properly grade a piece of land, multiple passes with equipment may be required. The disturbance acreage is based on the equipment list and days of the grading phase according to the anticipated maximum number of acres a given piece of equipment can pass over in an 8-hour workday.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 18
Table 5
Localized Significance of Construction Emissions
Maximum Emissions Pollutant (pounds/day)1
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Year 12 22.50 21.90 1.86 1.02
Year 23 20.50 21.00 1.11 0.91
Year 34 11.30 13.60 0.55 0.51
Maximum Daily Emissions (on-site) 22.50 21.90 1.86 1.02 Localized Significance Threshold5 103 562 4 3
Thresholds Exceeded? No No No No
Note:

2. The maximum on-site daily emissions occur during demolition phase for NOX, CO, and PM10, and during grading phase for PM2.5 in Year 1.

3. The maximum on-site daily emissions occur during grading phase for NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 in Year 2.

4. The maximum on-site daily emissions occur during building construction phase for NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 in Year 3.

Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
CO emissions are a function of vehicle idling time, meteorological conditions, and traffic flow. Under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthful levels (i.e., adversely affecting residents, school children, hospital patients, the elderly, etc.).

The SCAQMD requires a quantified assessment of CO hotspots when a project increases the volume-tocapacity ratio (also called the intersection capacity utilization) by 0.02 (two percent) for any intersection with an existing level of service LOS D or worse. Because traffic congestion is highest at intersections where vehicles queue and are subject to reduced speeds, these hot spots are typically produced at intersections.

The Basin is designated as an attainment/maintenance area for the Federal CO standards and an attainment area for State standards. There has been a decline in CO emissions even though vehicle miles 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 19
traveled on U.S. urban and rural roads have increased. Nationwide estimated anthropogenic CO emissions have decreased 68 percent between 1990 and 2014. In 2014, mobile sources accounted for 82 percent of the nation’s total anthropogenic CO emissions. 9 CO emissions have continued to decline since
this time. The Basin was re-designated as attainment in 2007 and is no longer addressed in the SCAQMD’s AQMP. Three major control programs have contributed to the reduced per-vehicle CO emissions: exhaust standards, cleaner burning fuels, and motor vehicle inspection/maintenance programs.

A detailed CO analysis was conducted in the Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (CO Plan) for the SCAQMD’s 2003 Air Quality Management Plan, which is the most recent AQMP that addresses CO concentrations. The locations selected for microscale modeling in the CO Plan are worst-case intersections in the Basin and would likely experience the highest CO concentrations. Thus, CO analysis within the CO Plan is utilized in a comparison to the proposed project, since it represents a worst-case scenario with heavy traffic volumes within the Basin.

Of these locations, the Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection in Los Angeles experienced the highest CO concentration (4.6 parts per million [ppm]), which is well below the 35-ppm 1-hr CO Federal standard. The Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection is one of the most congested intersections in Southern California with an ADT volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day. As the CO hotspots were not experienced at the Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection, it can be reasonably inferred that CO hotspots would not be experienced at any intersections within the City near the project site due to the comparatively low volume of traffic (51 peak trips in the a.m. and 31 peak trips during the p.m.)
10 that would occur because of project implementation. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.

Impact AQ-4: Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The proposed project does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with odors.

Construction activities associated with the project may generate detectable odors from heavy-duty equipment exhaust and architectural coatings. However, construction-related odors would be short-term in nature and cease upon project completion. In addition, the project would be required to comply with the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485, which minimizes the idling time of construction equipment either by shutting it off when not in use or by reducing the time of idling to no more than five minutes. This would further reduce the detectable odors from heavy-duty equipment exhaust. The project would also comply with the SCAQMD Regulation XI, Rule 1113 – Architectural Coating, which would minimize odor impacts from ROG emissions during architectural coating. Any impacts to existing adjacent land uses would be short-term and are less than significant. 9 United States Environmental Protection Agency¸ Carbon Monoxide Emissions, https://cfpub.epa.gov/roe/indicator_pdf.cfm?i=10, accessed by February 27, 2023. 10 Coco Traffic Planners, Inc., 8366 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis, October 4, 2022.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 20
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 21

REFERENCES
Documents

1. City of Beverly Hills, General Plan Land Use Designations - City of Beverly Hills, January 25, 2022, https://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/1807037749744115284/Landuse_11x17_20 220125.pdf, accessed February 2, 2023.

2. City of Beverly Hills, Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan, February 17, 2009, http://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/24347783778629768/SustainableCityPlan.pd f, accessed February 2, 2023.

3. City of Beverly Hills, City of Beverly Hills Zoning Map, October 2021.

4. Coco Traffic Planners, Inc., 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis Beverly Hills – California, October 4, 2022.

5. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Application of the South Coast Air Quality Management District for Leave to File Brief of Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Party and Brief of Amicus Curiae. In the Supreme Court of California. Sierra Club, Revive the San Joaquin, and League of Women Voters of Fresno v. County of Fresno, 2014.

6. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Application for Leave to File Brief of Amicus Curiae Brief of San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District in Support of Defendant and Respondent, County of Fresno and Real Party In Interest and Respondent, Friant Ranch, L.P. In the Supreme Court of California. Sierra Club, Revive the San Joaquin, and League of Women Voters of Fresno v. County of Fresno, 2014.

7. Southern California Association of Governments, the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, adopted September 3, 2020.

8. South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2022 Air Quality Management Plan, adopted December 2, 2022.

9. South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, November 1993.

10. South Coast Air Quality Management District, SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, March 2015.

11. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, July 2008.

12. United States Environmental Protection Agency¸ Carbon Monoxide Emissions, https://cfpub.epa.gov/roe/indicator_pdf.cfm?i=10, accessed by February 27, 2023. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Air Quality Technical Memorandum 22
Websites / Programs

1. Google Earth, 2023.

2. South Coast Air Quality Management District, California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2022.1.1.5.

Appendix A
Air Quality Emissions Data
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
1 / 80
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2023) - Unmitigated

3.2. Demolition (2023) - Mitigated
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
2 / 80

3.3. Grading (2023) - Unmitigated

3.4. Grading (2023) - Mitigated

3.5. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated

3.6. Grading (2024) - Mitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated

3.8. Building Construction (2024) - Mitigated

3.9. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.10. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated

3.11. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated

3.12. Paving (2024) - Mitigated

3.13. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated

3.14. Architectural Coating (2024) - Mitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.1.2. Mitigated

4.2. Energy
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
3 / 80

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. Unmitigated

4.3.1. Mitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. Unmitigated

4.4.1. Mitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. Unmitigated

4.5.1. Mitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.6.2. Mitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
4 / 80

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.7.2. Mitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.8.2. Mitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.9.2. Mitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated

4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
5 / 80

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.2.2. Mitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.3.2. Mitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.9.2. Mitigated
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
6 / 80

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.11.2. Mitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.12.2. Mitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.13.2. Mitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
7 / 80

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.14.2. Mitigated

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.15.2. Mitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
8 / 80

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2.2. Mitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
9 / 80

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Beverly Hills 2
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.70
Precipitation (days) 19.6
Location 8633 Wilshire Blvd, Beverly Hills, CA 90211, USA County Los Angeles-South Coast
City Beverly Hills
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 4304
EDFZ 16
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
General Office
Building

13.0 1000sqft 0.30 10,354 600 0.00 — —
Enclosed Parking
with Elevator

76.0 Space 0.68 22,457 0.00 0.00 — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
10 / 80

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Construction C-10-A Water Exposed Surfaces
Construction C-11 Limit Vehicle Speeds on Unpaved Roads Energy E-1 Buildings Exceed 2019 Title 24 Building Envelope Energy Efficiency Standards
Water W-4 Require Low-Flow Water Fixtures
Waste S-1/S-2 Implement Waste Reduction Plan

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.93 9.23 25.9 24.2 0.06 1.03 1.89 2.92 0.95 0.42 1.37 — 7,935 7,935 0.37 0.74 11.0 8,175 Mit. 2.93 9.23 25.9 24.2 0.06 1.03 1.50 2.52 0.95 0.38 1.33 — 7,935 7,935 0.37 0.74 11.0 8,175 %
Reduced
— — — — — — 21% 14% — 10% 3% — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 3.16 2.45 28.4 25.0 0.06 1.14 1.92 3.06 1.05 0.42 1.48 — 8,000 8,000 0.40 0.74 0.29 8,230 Mit. 3.16 2.45 28.4 25.0 0.06 1.14 1.52 2.66 1.05 0.38 1.43 — 8,000 8,000 0.40 0.74 0.29 8,230 %
Reduced
— — — — — — 21% 13% — 10% 3% — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
11 / 80
Average — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily
(Max)
Unmit. 1.35 1.21 11.0 12.2 0.02 0.48 0.45 0.94 0.45 0.10 0.55 — 3,015 3,015 0.13 0.16 1.13 3,068 Mit. 1.35 1.21 11.0 12.2 0.02 0.48 0.38 0.87 0.45 0.10 0.54 — 3,015 3,015 0.13 0.16 1.13 3,068 %
Reduced
— — — — — — 16% 8% — 8% 1% — — — — — — —
Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.25 0.22 2.01 2.23 < 0.005 0.09 0.08 0.17 0.08 0.02 0.10 — 499 499 0.02 0.03 0.19 508 Mit. 0.25 0.22 2.01 2.23 < 0.005 0.09 0.07 0.16 0.08 0.02 0.10 — 499 499 0.02 0.03 0.19 508 %
Reduced
— — — — — — 16% 8% — 8% 1% — — — — — — —

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 2.93 9.23 25.9 24.2 0.06 1.03 1.89 2.92 0.95 0.42 1.37 — 7,935 7,935 0.37 0.74 11.0 8,175 2025 1.40 1.17 10.5 14.5 0.03 0.47 0.21 0.69 0.44 0.05 0.49 — 2,942 2,942 0.12 0.05 1.11 2,961 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 3.16 2.45 28.4 25.0 0.06 1.14 1.92 3.06 1.05 0.42 1.48 — 8,000 8,000 0.40 0.74 0.29 8,230 2024 2.93 2.28 26.1 24.0 0.06 1.03 1.89 2.92 0.95 0.42 1.37 — 7,925 7,925 0.37 0.74 0.28 8,155 2025 1.40 1.17 10.5 14.4 0.03 0.47 0.21 0.69 0.44 0.05 0.49 — 2,932 2,932 0.12 0.05 0.03 2,951 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 0.30 0.24 2.66 2.42 < 0.005 0.11 0.20 0.31 0.10 0.04 0.14 — 642 642 0.03 0.05 0.33 658 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
12 / 80
2024 1.35 1.21 11.0 12.2 0.02 0.48 0.45 0.94 0.45 0.10 0.55 — 3,015 3,015 0.13 0.16 1.13 3,068 2025 0.75 0.63 5.62 7.71 0.01 0.25 0.11 0.37 0.23 0.03 0.26 — 1,568 1,568 0.06 0.03 0.26 1,578 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 0.06 0.04 0.49 0.44 < 0.005 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.02 0.01 0.03 — 106 106 0.01 0.01 0.05 109 2024 0.25 0.22 2.01 2.23 < 0.005 0.09 0.08 0.17 0.08 0.02 0.10 — 499 499 0.02 0.03 0.19 508 2025 0.14 0.11 1.02 1.41 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.04 < 0.005 0.05 — 260 260 0.01 < 0.005 0.04 261

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 2.93 9.23 25.9 24.2 0.06 1.03 1.50 2.52 0.95 0.38 1.33 — 7,935 7,935 0.37 0.74 11.0 8,175 2025 1.40 1.17 10.5 14.5 0.03 0.47 0.21 0.69 0.44 0.05 0.49 — 2,942 2,942 0.12 0.05 1.11 2,961 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 3.16 2.45 28.4 25.0 0.06 1.14 1.52 2.66 1.05 0.38 1.43 — 8,000 8,000 0.40 0.74 0.29 8,230 2024 2.93 2.28 26.1 24.0 0.06 1.03 1.50 2.52 0.95 0.38 1.33 — 7,925 7,925 0.37 0.74 0.28 8,155 2025 1.40 1.17 10.5 14.4 0.03 0.47 0.21 0.69 0.44 0.05 0.49 — 2,932 2,932 0.12 0.05 0.03 2,951 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 0.30 0.24 2.66 2.42 < 0.005 0.11 0.17 0.28 0.10 0.04 0.14 — 642 642 0.03 0.05 0.33 658 2024 1.35 1.21 11.0 12.2 0.02 0.48 0.38 0.87 0.45 0.10 0.54 — 3,015 3,015 0.13 0.16 1.13 3,068 2025 0.75 0.63 5.62 7.71 0.01 0.25 0.11 0.37 0.23 0.03 0.26 — 1,568 1,568 0.06 0.03 0.26 1,578 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 0.06 0.04 0.49 0.44 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.02 — 106 106 0.01 0.01 0.05 109 2024 0.25 0.22 2.01 2.23 < 0.005 0.09 0.07 0.16 0.08 0.02 0.10 — 499 499 0.02 0.03 0.19 508 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
13 / 80
2025 0.14 0.11 1.02 1.41 < 0.005 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.04 < 0.005 0.05 — 260 260 0.01 < 0.005 0.04 261

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 14.8 13.7 36.9 35.1 0.06 1.94 0.00 1.94 1.94 0.00 1.94 10.9 7,057 7,068 1.40 0.07 0.03 7,122 Mit. 14.8 13.7 36.9 35.1 0.06 1.94 0.00 1.94 1.94 0.00 1.94 7.25 7,055 7,062 1.02 0.06 0.03 7,107 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — 34% < 0.5% < 0.5% 27% 2% — < 0.5% Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 14.5 13.4 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 0.00 1.94 1.94 0.00 1.94 10.9 7,051 7,062 1.39 0.07 0.03 7,117 Mit. 14.5 13.4 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 0.00 1.94 1.94 0.00 1.94 7.25 7,049 7,056 1.02 0.06 0.03 7,101 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — 34% < 0.5% < 0.5% 27% 2% — < 0.5% Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.21 0.43 0.11 1.07 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 10.9 324 335 1.12 0.01 0.03 367 Mit. 0.21 0.43 0.11 1.07 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 7.25 322 329 0.75 0.01 0.03 351 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — 34% 1% 2% 33% 8% — 4%
Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 1.81 53.6 55.4 0.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 60.7 Mit. 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 1.20 53.3 54.5 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 58.2 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
14 / 80
% — — — — — — — — — — — 34% 1% 2% 33% 8% — 4%
Reduced

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area 0.25 0.47 0.01 1.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.87 5.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.89 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 278 278 0.02 < 0.005 — 279 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.43 23.0 27.4 0.46 0.01 — 42.1 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 6.52 0.00 6.52 0.65 0.00 — 22.8 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

14.5 13.2 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 — 1.94 1.94 — 1.94 — 6,750 6,750 0.27 0.05 — 6,772 Total 14.8 13.7 36.9 35.1 0.06 1.94 0.00 1.94 1.94 0.00 1.94 10.9 7,057 7,068 1.40 0.07 0.03 7,122 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area — 0.23 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 278 278 0.02 < 0.005 — 279 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.43 23.0 27.4 0.46 0.01 — 42.1 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 6.52 0.00 6.52 0.65 0.00 — 22.8 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

14.5 13.2 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 — 1.94 1.94 — 1.94 — 6,750 6,750 0.27 0.05 — 6,772 Total 14.5 13.4 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 0.00 1.94 1.94 0.00 1.94 10.9 7,051 7,062 1.39 0.07 0.03 7,117 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
15 / 80
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area 0.17 0.39 0.01 0.98 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.02 4.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.03 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 278 278 0.02 < 0.005 — 279 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 4.43 23.0 27.4 0.46 0.01 — 42.1 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 6.52 0.00 6.52 0.65 0.00 — 22.8 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

0.04 0.04 0.10 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 18.5 18.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 18.6 Total 0.21 0.43 0.11 1.07 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 10.9 324 335 1.12 0.01 0.03 367 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area 0.03 0.07 < 0.005 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.67 0.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.67 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 46.1 46.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 46.3 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.73 3.81 4.54 0.08 < 0.005 — 6.96 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 1.08 0.00 1.08 0.11 0.00 — 3.77 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 Stationar
y

0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.06 3.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.07 Total 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 1.81 53.6 55.4 0.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 60.7

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
16 / 80
Area 0.25 0.47 0.01 1.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.87 5.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.89 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 278 278 0.02 < 0.005 — 279 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 3.99 20.7 24.7 0.41 0.01 — 37.9 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 3.26 0.00 3.26 0.33 0.00 — 11.4 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

14.5 13.2 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 — 1.94 1.94 — 1.94 — 6,750 6,750 0.27 0.05 — 6,772 Total 14.8 13.7 36.9 35.1 0.06 1.94 0.00 1.94 1.94 0.00 1.94 7.25 7,055 7,062 1.02 0.06 0.03 7,107 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area — 0.23 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 278 278 0.02 < 0.005 — 279 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 3.99 20.7 24.7 0.41 0.01 — 37.9 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 3.26 0.00 3.26 0.33 0.00 — 11.4 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

14.5 13.2 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 — 1.94 1.94 — 1.94 — 6,750 6,750 0.27 0.05 — 6,772 Total 14.5 13.4 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 0.00 1.94 1.94 0.00 1.94 7.25 7,049 7,056 1.02 0.06 0.03 7,101 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area 0.17 0.39 0.01 0.98 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.02 4.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.03 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 278 278 0.02 < 0.005 — 279 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 3.99 20.7 24.7 0.41 0.01 — 37.9 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 3.26 0.00 3.26 0.33 0.00 — 11.4 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Stationar
y

0.04 0.04 0.10 0.09 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 18.5 18.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 18.6 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
17 / 80
Total 0.21 0.43 0.11 1.07 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 7.25 322 329 0.75 0.01 0.03 351 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area 0.03 0.07 < 0.005 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.67 0.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.67 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 46.1 46.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 46.3 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.66 3.43 4.09 0.07 < 0.005 — 6.28 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 0.54 0.00 0.54 0.05 0.00 — 1.89 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 Stationar
y

0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.06 3.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.07 Total 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 1.20 53.3 54.5 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 58.2

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.86 1.56 15.4 14.6 0.02 0.67 — 0.67 0.62 — 0.62 — 2,157 2,157 0.09 0.02 — 2,165 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 1.19 1.19 — 0.18 0.18 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
18 / 80
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.11 0.09 0.89 0.84 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 124 124 0.01 < 0.005 — 125 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.07 0.07 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.02 0.16 0.15 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 20.5 20.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 20.6 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 137 137 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 138 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.04 0.01 0.68 0.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 — 420 420 0.03 0.07 0.02 440 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.99 7.99 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 8.10 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 24.1 24.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 25.3 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.32 1.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.34 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
19 / 80
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.00 4.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.20

3.2. Demolition (2023) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.86 1.56 15.4 14.6 0.02 0.67 — 0.67 0.62 — 0.62 — 2,157 2,157 0.09 0.02 — 2,165 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 1.19 1.19 — 0.18 0.18 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.11 0.09 0.89 0.84 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 124 124 0.01 < 0.005 — 125 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.07 0.07 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.02 0.16 0.15 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 20.5 20.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 20.6 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
20 / 80
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 137 137 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 138 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.04 0.01 0.68 0.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 — 420 420 0.03 0.07 0.02 440 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.99 7.99 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 8.10 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 24.1 24.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 25.3 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.32 1.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.34 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.00 4.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.20

3.3. Grading (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
21 / 80
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Off-Road
Equipment

2.73 2.29 22.5 21.9 0.03 1.09 — 1.09 1.00 — 1.00 — 3,338 3,338 0.14 0.03 — 3,349 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.54 0.54 — 0.06 0.06 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.17 0.14 1.37 1.33 < 0.005 0.07 — 0.07 0.06 — 0.06 — 202 202 0.01 < 0.005 — 203 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.03 0.03 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.03 0.25 0.24 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 33.5 33.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 33.6 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
22 / 80
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.09 1.04 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 205 205 0.01 0.01 0.02 208 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.34 0.08 5.79 2.06 0.03 0.06 1.19 1.24 0.06 0.32 0.37 — 4,457 4,457 0.26 0.70 0.26 4,673 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.6 12.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12.8 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.02 0.01 0.36 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 270 270 0.02 0.04 0.27 284 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.09 2.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.12 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 44.8 44.8 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 47.0

3.4. Grading (2023) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.73 2.29 22.5 21.9 0.03 1.09 — 1.09 1.00 — 1.00 — 3,338 3,338 0.14 0.03 — 3,349 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
23 / 80
Dust — — — — — — 0.14 0.14 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.17 0.14 1.37 1.33 < 0.005 0.07 — 0.07 0.06 — 0.06 — 202 202 0.01 < 0.005 — 203 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.03 0.25 0.24 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 33.5 33.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 33.6 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.07 0.09 1.04 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 205 205 0.01 0.01 0.02 208 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.34 0.08 5.79 2.06 0.03 0.06 1.19 1.24 0.06 0.32 0.37 — 4,457 4,457 0.26 0.70 0.26 4,673 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
24 / 80
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.6 12.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12.8 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.02 0.01 0.36 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 270 270 0.02 0.04 0.27 284 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.09 2.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.12 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 44.8 44.8 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 47.0

3.5. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.54 2.13 20.5 21.0 0.03 0.97 — 0.97 0.89 — 0.89 — 3,338 3,338 0.14 0.03 — 3,350 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.54 0.54 — 0.06 0.06 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.54 2.13 20.5 21.0 0.03 0.97 — 0.97 0.89 — 0.89 — 3,338 3,338 0.14 0.03 — 3,350 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
25 / 80
Dust — — — — — — 0.54 0.54 — 0.06 0.06 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.46 0.38 3.69 3.79 0.01 0.17 — 0.17 0.16 — 0.16 — 601 601 0.02 < 0.005 — 603 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.10 0.10 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.08 0.07 0.67 0.69 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 99.5 99.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 99.9 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.02 0.02 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.07 1.13 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 212 212 0.01 0.01 0.84 215 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.32 0.09 5.34 1.99 0.03 0.06 1.16 1.21 0.06 0.32 0.37 — 4,385 4,385 0.23 0.70 10.1 4,610 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
26 / 80
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 201 201 0.01 0.01 0.02 203 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.31 0.08 5.54 1.98 0.03 0.06 1.16 1.21 0.06 0.32 0.37 — 4,386 4,386 0.23 0.70 0.26 4,602 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 36.7 36.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 37.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.06 0.02 1.01 0.35 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.22 0.01 0.06 0.07 — 790 790 0.04 0.13 0.79 829 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.07 6.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.16 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 < 0.005 0.18 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 131 131 0.01 0.02 0.13 137

3.6. Grading (2024) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.54 2.13 20.5 21.0 0.03 0.97 — 0.97 0.89 — 0.89 — 3,338 3,338 0.14 0.03 — 3,350 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.14 0.14 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
27 / 80
Off-Road
Equipment

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.46 0.38 3.69 3.79 0.01 0.17 — 0.17 0.16 — 0.16 — 601 601 0.02 < 0.005 — 603 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.03 0.03 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.08 0.07 0.67 0.69 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 99.5 99.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 99.9 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.07 1.13 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 212 212 0.01 0.01 0.84 215 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.32 0.09 5.34 1.99 0.03 0.06 1.16 1.21 0.06 0.32 0.37 — 4,385 4,385 0.23 0.70 10.1 4,610 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
28 / 80
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 201 201 0.01 0.01 0.02 203 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.31 0.08 5.54 1.98 0.03 0.06 1.16 1.21 0.06 0.32 0.37 — 4,386 4,386 0.23 0.70 0.26 4,602 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 36.7 36.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 37.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.06 0.02 1.01 0.35 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.22 0.01 0.06 0.07 — 790 790 0.04 0.13 0.79 829 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.07 6.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.16 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 < 0.005 0.18 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 131 131 0.01 0.02 0.13 137

3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.44 1.21 11.3 13.6 0.02 0.55 — 0.55 0.51 — 0.51 — 2,595 2,595 0.11 0.02 — 2,604 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
29 / 80
Off-Road
Equipment

1.44 1.21 11.3 13.6 0.02 0.55 — 0.55 0.51 — 0.51 — 2,595 2,595 0.11 0.02 — 2,604 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.77 0.65 6.08 7.31 0.01 0.30 — 0.30 0.27 — 0.27 — 1,392 1,392 0.06 0.01 — 1,396 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.14 0.12 1.11 1.33 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 230 230 0.01 < 0.005 — 231 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 180 180 0.01 0.01 0.71 183 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.20 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 — 173 173 0.01 0.02 0.47 181 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 171 171 0.01 0.01 0.02 173 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 — 174 174 0.01 0.02 0.01 181 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 92.8 92.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16 94.1 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.12 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 93.0 93.0 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 97.1 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
30 / 80
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.4 15.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 15.6 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.4 15.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 16.1 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.8. Building Construction (2024) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.44 1.21 11.3 13.6 0.02 0.55 — 0.55 0.51 — 0.51 — 2,595 2,595 0.11 0.02 — 2,604 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.44 1.21 11.3 13.6 0.02 0.55 — 0.55 0.51 — 0.51 — 2,595 2,595 0.11 0.02 — 2,604 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.77 0.65 6.08 7.31 0.01 0.30 — 0.30 0.27 — 0.27 — 1,392 1,392 0.06 0.01 — 1,396 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
31 / 80
Off-Road
Equipment

0.14 0.12 1.11 1.33 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 230 230 0.01 < 0.005 — 231 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 180 180 0.01 0.01 0.71 183 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.20 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 — 173 173 0.01 0.02 0.47 181 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 171 171 0.01 0.01 0.02 173 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 — 174 174 0.01 0.02 0.01 181 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 92.8 92.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16 94.1 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.12 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 93.0 93.0 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 97.1 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.4 15.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 15.6 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.4 15.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 16.1 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
32 / 80
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.33 1.11 10.2 13.5 0.02 0.47 — 0.47 0.43 — 0.43 — 2,595 2,595 0.11 0.02 — 2,604 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.33 1.11 10.2 13.5 0.02 0.47 — 0.47 0.43 — 0.43 — 2,595 2,595 0.11 0.02 — 2,604 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.71 0.59 5.47 7.23 0.01 0.25 — 0.25 0.23 — 0.23 — 1,386 1,386 0.06 0.01 — 1,391 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.13 0.11 1.00 1.32 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.04 — 0.04 — 230 230 0.01 < 0.005 — 230 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 176 176 0.01 0.01 0.65 179 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.19 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 171 171 0.01 0.02 0.47 178 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
33 / 80
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 167 167 0.01 0.01 0.02 169 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.20 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 171 171 0.01 0.02 0.01 178 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 90.6 90.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.15 91.8 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.11 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 91.2 91.2 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 95.2 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.0 15.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 15.2 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.1 15.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 15.8 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.10. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.33 1.11 10.2 13.5 0.02 0.47 — 0.47 0.43 — 0.43 — 2,595 2,595 0.11 0.02 — 2,604 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
34 / 80
Off-Road
Equipment

1.33 1.11 10.2 13.5 0.02 0.47 — 0.47 0.43 — 0.43 — 2,595 2,595 0.11 0.02 — 2,604 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.71 0.59 5.47 7.23 0.01 0.25 — 0.25 0.23 — 0.23 — 1,386 1,386 0.06 0.01 — 1,391 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.13 0.11 1.00 1.32 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.04 — 0.04 — 230 230 0.01 < 0.005 — 230 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 176 176 0.01 0.01 0.65 179 Vendor 0.01 0.01 0.19 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 171 171 0.01 0.02 0.47 178 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 167 167 0.01 0.01 0.02 169 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.20 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 171 171 0.01 0.02 0.01 178 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 90.6 90.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.15 91.8 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.11 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 91.2 91.2 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 95.2 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
35 / 80
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.0 15.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 15.2 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.1 15.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 15.8 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Paving (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.42 0.35 2.96 3.39 0.01 0.15 — 0.15 0.14 — 0.14 — 514 514 0.02 < 0.005 — 515 Paving — 0.36 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.01 < 0.005 0.04 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.04 7.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.06 Paving — < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.17 1.17 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.17 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
36 / 80
Paving — < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 106 106 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.42 107 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.40 1.40 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.41 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.23 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.12. Paving (2024) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
37 / 80
Off-Road
Equipment

0.42 0.35 2.96 3.39 0.01 0.15 — 0.15 0.14 — 0.14 — 514 514 0.02 < 0.005 — 515 Paving — 0.36 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.17 1.17 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.17 Paving — < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 106 106 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.42 107 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
38 / 80
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.40 1.40 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.41 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.23 0.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.13. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.17 0.14 0.91 1.15 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 7.81 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.83 1.83 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.84 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.11 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
39 / 80
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.30 0.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.30 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 36.0 36.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 36.5 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.47 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.48 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.08 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.14. Architectural Coating (2024) - Mitigated
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
40 / 80
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.17 0.14 0.91 1.15 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
— 7.81 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
41 / 80
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 36.0 36.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 36.5 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.47 0.47 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.48 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.08 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Mobile source emissions results are presented in Sections 2.6. No further detailed breakdown of emissions is available.

4.1.2. Mitigated
Mobile source emissions results are presented in Sections 2.5. No further detailed breakdown of emissions is available.

4.2. Energy
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
42 / 80

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — 158 158 0.01 < 0.005 — 158
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — — 121 121 0.01 < 0.005 — 121
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 278 278 0.02 < 0.005 — 279 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — 158 158 0.01 < 0.005 — 158
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — — 121 121 0.01 < 0.005 — 121
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 278 278 0.02 < 0.005 — 279 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — 26.1 26.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 26.2 Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — — 20.0 20.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 20.1 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
43 / 80
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 46.1 46.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 46.3

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — 158 158 0.01 < 0.005 — 158
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — — 121 121 0.01 < 0.005 — 121
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 278 278 0.02 < 0.005 — 279 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — 158 158 0.01 < 0.005 — 158
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — — 121 121 0.01 < 0.005 — 121
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 278 278 0.02 < 0.005 — 279 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — 26.1 26.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 26.2 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
44 / 80
Enclosed — — — — — — — — — — — — 20.0 20.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 20.1 Parking
with
Elevator
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 46.1 46.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 46.3

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
45 / 80
General 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Office
Building
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
46 / 80
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.22 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.25 0.23 0.01 1.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.87 5.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.89 Total 0.25 0.47 0.01 1.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.87 5.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.89 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
47 / 80
Consum — 0.22 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
er
Products
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — 0.23 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.67 0.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.67 Total 0.03 0.07 < 0.005 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.67 0.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.67

4.3.1. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.22 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
48 / 80
Landsca 0.25 0.23 0.01 1.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.87 5.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.89 pe
Equipme
Total 0.25 0.47 0.01 1.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.87 5.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.89 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.22 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — 0.23 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
49 / 80
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.43 23.0 27.4 0.46 0.01 — 42.1
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.43 23.0 27.4 0.46 0.01 — 42.1 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.43 23.0 27.4 0.46 0.01 — 42.1
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 4.43 23.0 27.4 0.46 0.01 — 42.1 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.73 3.81 4.54 0.08 < 0.005 — 6.96 Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.73 3.81 4.54 0.08 < 0.005 — 6.96

4.4.1. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
50 / 80
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.99 20.7 24.7 0.41 0.01 — 37.9
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 3.99 20.7 24.7 0.41 0.01 — 37.9 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.99 20.7 24.7 0.41 0.01 — 37.9
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 3.99 20.7 24.7 0.41 0.01 — 37.9 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.66 3.43 4.09 0.07 < 0.005 — 6.28 Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.66 3.43 4.09 0.07 < 0.005 — 6.28 Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
51 / 80

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 6.52 0.00 6.52 0.65 0.00 — 22.8
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 6.52 0.00 6.52 0.65 0.00 — 22.8 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 6.52 0.00 6.52 0.65 0.00 — 22.8
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 6.52 0.00 6.52 0.65 0.00 — 22.8 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 1.08 0.00 1.08 0.11 0.00 — 3.77
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
52 / 80
Enclosed — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
with
Elevator
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 1.08 0.00 1.08 0.11 0.00 — 3.77

4.5.1. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.26 0.00 3.26 0.33 0.00 — 11.4
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 3.26 0.00 3.26 0.33 0.00 — 11.4 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.26 0.00 3.26 0.33 0.00 — 11.4
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 3.26 0.00 3.26 0.33 0.00 — 11.4 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
53 / 80
General — — — — — — — — — — — 0.54 0.00 0.54 0.05 0.00 — 1.89 Office
Building
Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.54 0.00 0.54 0.05 0.00 — 1.89

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
54 / 80
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005

4.6.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.03 0.03
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
55 / 80
Equipme TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e nt
Type
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
56 / 80

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r

14.5 13.2 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 — 1.94 1.94 — 1.94 — 6,750 6,750 0.27 0.05 — 6,772 Total 14.5 13.2 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 — 1.94 1.94 — 1.94 — 6,750 6,750 0.27 0.05 — 6,772 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r

14.5 13.2 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 — 1.94 1.94 — 1.94 — 6,750 6,750 0.27 0.05 — 6,772 Total 14.5 13.2 36.9 33.6 0.06 1.94 — 1.94 1.94 — 1.94 — 6,750 6,750 0.27 0.05 — 6,772 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r

0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.06 3.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.07 Total 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.06 3.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.07

4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
57 / 80
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Emergen
cy
Generato
r

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
58 / 80
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
59 / 80
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
60 / 80
Daily,——————————————————
Summer
(Max)
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
61 / 80
Remove — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
d
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
62 / 80
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
63 / 80
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 10/1/2023 10/30/2023 5.00 21.0 —
Grading Grading 12/1/2023 4/1/2024 5.00 87.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 4/2/2024 9/30/2025 5.00 391 — Paving Paving 9/9/2024 9/16/2024 5.00 5.00 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/17/2024 9/24/2024 5.00 5.00 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
64 / 80
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Demolition Rubber Tired Loaders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37 Grading Bore/Drill Rigs Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Grading Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.29
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Surfacing Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48 Demolition Skid Steer Loaders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 71.0 0.37 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Skid Steer Loaders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 71.0 0.37 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Other Construction
Equipment
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 82.0 0.42
Building Construction Rubber Tired Loaders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 150 0.36 Building Construction Signal Boards Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 6.00 0.82 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37

5.2.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
65 / 80
Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Demolition Rubber Tired Loaders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37 Grading Bore/Drill Rigs Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Grading Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.29
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Surfacing Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48 Demolition Skid Steer Loaders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 71.0 0.37 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Skid Steer Loaders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 71.0 0.37 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Other Construction
Equipment
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 82.0 0.42
Building Construction Rubber Tired Loaders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 150 0.36 Building Construction Signal Boards Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 6.00 0.82 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37

5.3. Construction Vehicles
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
66 / 80

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 10.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 15.0 7.50 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 50.0 25.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 12.7 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 5.38 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 7.50 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 2.55 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
67 / 80

5.3.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 10.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 15.0 7.50 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 50.0 25.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 12.7 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 5.38 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 7.50 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 2.55 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
68 / 80

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 11,521 3,542 1,788

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (Cubic Yards) Material Exported (Cubic Yards) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Ton of Debris)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,150 —
Grading — 13,800 43.5 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.68

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
General Office Building 0.00 0%
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.68 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
69 / 80
kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2024 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2023 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2025 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Total all Land Uses 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Total all Land Uses 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 11,521 3,542 1,788
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
70 / 80

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) General Office Building 108,108 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 82,898 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.11.2. Mitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) General Office Building 108,108 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 82,898 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
71 / 80

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) General Office Building 2,310,539 8,415
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00

5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) General Office Building 2,082,951 8,415
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
General Office Building 12.1 0.00
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00

5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
General Office Building 6.04 0.00
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
72 / 80
General Office Building Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.02 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Office Building Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0

5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced General Office Building Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.02 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Office Building Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.15.2. Mitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor Emergency Generator Diesel 1.00 24.0 24.0 335 0.73

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
73 / 80
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
— —

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
74 / 80

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

5.18.2.2. Mitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 7.73 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 7.05 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.30 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.

Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
75 / 80
Temperature and Extreme Heat 1 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 1 1 1 2
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
76 / 80

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 57.0
AQ-PM 66.4
AQ-DPM 71.0
Drinking Water 73.3
Lead Risk Housing 41.8
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 74.8
Traffic 65.8
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 23.5
Groundwater 76.6
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 79.6
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 56.0
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 29.4
Cardio-vascular 18.7
Low Birth Weights 3.70
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
77 / 80
Education 16.8
Housing 89.1
Linguistic 66.2
Poverty 39.2
Unemployment 84.0

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 81.22674195
Employed 82.72808931
Median HI 60.51584756
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 87.24496343
High school enrollment 3.105350956
Preschool enrollment 95.7141024
Transportation —
Auto Access 26.75477993
Active commuting 78.81432054
Social —
2-parent households 9.880662133
Voting 38.62440652
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 14.59001668
Park access 26.11317849
Retail density 95.90658283
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
78 / 80
Supermarket access 79.07096112
Tree canopy 54.38213782
Housing —
Homeownership 11.95945079
Housing habitability 23.08481971
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 10.20146285 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 43.56473759
Uncrowded housing 68.66418581
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 70.78147055
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 88.4
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 75.5
Cognitively Disabled 76.7
Physically Disabled 18.0
Heart Attack ER Admissions 89.4
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 89.1
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
79 / 80
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 94.5
Elderly 8.1
English Speaking 49.2
Foreign-born 74.8
Outdoor Workers 89.5
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 7.8
Traffic Density 70.8
Traffic Access 87.4
Other Indices —
Hardship 15.1
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 26.5

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 50.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 59.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
80 / 80
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use According to CE Memo Report
Note: Need to request Landscaping Plan from Applicant
Landscape is a rough estimate
Construction: Construction Phases According to Construction Questionnaire Construction 18 Months
Architectural default
Paving default
Construction: Off-Road Equipment Refer to Questionnaire Coating equipment default
Construction: Trips and VMT Refer to Questionnaire
Coating and Paving left as default
Construction: Architectural Coatings SCAQMD Rule 1113
Operations: Architectural Coatings SCAQMD Rule 1113
Operations: Energy Use Per Operational Questionnaire
No natural gas usage
Operations: Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps According to Project Plans Generator is on assumptions

APPENDIX D
GHG Memorandum
This page is intentionally left blank.
5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500, Santa Ana, CA 92707
Office: 949.472.3505 | Fax: 949.472.8373

M E M O R A N D U M
To: Kristen Bogue, Michael Baker International
From: Eddie Torres, Michael Baker International
Date: March 3, 2023
Subject: 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project – Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum

PURPOSE
The purpose of this technical memorandum is to evaluate potential greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts resulting from the construction of the proposed 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project (project), located in the City of Beverly Hills (City), California.

Surrounding jurisdictions include the City of Los Angeles along all sides and the City of West Hollywood to the west.

The project site is located in the southeast corner of the City at 8633 Wilshire Boulevard. As shown on Exhibit 2, Site Vicinity, the site encompasses approximately 12,783 square feet of lot area bordered to the south by Wilshire Boulevard, and to the west by North Carson Road. Surrounding land uses generally include single-family residential uses to the north and commercial uses to the east, south, and west.

EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The project site is developed with one existing commercial building. The approximately 6,787-gross square feet commercial building was previously the Bru’s Waffle (restaurant) and is currently vacant.1 1 “Gross” (square feet) is used to describe the total area of enclosed space measured from the exterior walls of a building, including unusable spaces (e.g., areas between walls, structural columns, or shafts); “net” (square feet) is used to describe the total area of enclosed space measured from the inside finished surface of surrounding walls that is available for furnishing, equipment, and personnel and excludes any unusable spaces. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 1
Regional Vicinity 02/2023 JN 187917

NOT TO SCALE

P A C I F I C

O C E A N
Pyramid
Lake
Lake
Piru
Castaic
Lake
ORANGE
COUNTY

VENTURA
COUNTY

WILSHIRE BLVD CARSON RD

WILLAMAM DR

STANLEY DR
02/2023 JN 187917

NOT TO SCALE

PROJECT SITE
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 4
The existing building is one story (approximately 25 feet in height). An existing 18-space surface parking lot is situated at the rear of the building with ingress/egress provided via North Carson Road. The project site is currently designated Low Density General Commercial and zoned Commercial (C-3) with a Mixed Use Overlay Zone, allowing a 2.0 floor area ratio (FAR) and 45-foot maximum building height with an additional 15-foot permitted for rooftop uses.2,3
Surrounding uses adjacent to the project site include commercial and residential uses. The project site is located within walking distance of single-family homes and apartments in the area, as well as offices, retails, restaurants, and other commercial businesses along Wilshire Boulevard.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project would involve demolishing the existing single-story commercial building and surface parking lot and constructing an approximately 32,811-gross square foot (25,566-net square foot) commercial building with three floors of office/retail spaces, a penthouse/rooftop, and four levels of basement parking; refer to Exhibits 3a through 3g, Floor Plans. The roof top would feature a penthouse lunchroom (approximately 2,555 net square feet) and an outdoor terrace (approximately 5,237 net square feet) with canopy covered areas. The basement parking levels would encompass approximately 22,457 gross/net square feet (11,228.29 square feet per level) and accommodate 76 parking spaces (fully automated) with a bicycle rack room on the first basement level.

Pursuant to BHMC Sections 10-3-2726 and 10-3-3107(A)(1)(b), the proposed building would be constructed to a height of 45 feet, with an additional 15 feet for rooftop appurtenances, for a total structure height of 60 feet. Additionally, the proposed building would be constructed to the project boundary on all sides with the exception of a ten-foot setback (with a six-foot green space) along the northern boundary of the project site.

Project construction would occur over approximately 18 months, beginning in the fall of 2023.

Construction of the project would include the following phases: demolition, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. It is anticipated that the project would be completed and operational by September 2025.
2 City of Beverly Hills, General Plan Land Use Designations - City of Beverly Hills, January 25, 2022, https://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/1807037749744115284/Landuse_11x17_20220125.pdf, accessed February 2, 2023 3 City of Beverly Hills, Zoning Map – City of Beverly Hills, October 05, 2021, https://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/159992164172431006/Zoning_11_17_Final20211005.pdf, accessed February 2, 2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3a
Ground Floor
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

PLANTER WALL
LID

BIOFILTRATION PLANTER
10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

REQUIRED & PROPOSED
3RD LEVEL SETBACK
01 24'-0"
A5.15
12'-8" 13'-0"
24'-0"
01 A5.25
11 A5.15

EXTERIOR
EGRESS
PATH
1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015
1016
1017
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1018
1019
8'-0" 9'-0" 8'-0"
ST - 101
ST - 102
ST - 103
107 108
109
111
104
106
105
2HR RATED CHAISE

FOR FUEL LINES
2HR RATED CHAISE

FOR FUEL LINES

FUEL CABINET

OFFICE SPACE
EX-1001 EX-1002 EX-1003
110
EX-1007 EX-1006
1001
1002
EX-1008

ELECTRICAL ROOM

SCE TRANSFORMER RM

LOADING - VAN ONLY
LOBBY

ELEVATOR ELEVATOR LOBBY
STAIR 1

OFFICE SPACE MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM
JC

ELEC ROOM
STAIR 2
PARKING BAY 1 PARKING BAY 2 - ADA

PARKING DRIVEWAY

EXHAUST SHAFT

SUPPLY SHAFT

TRASH ROOM
112
113
3'-0"
3'-0"
8'-0" 6'-0 1/2"
8'-2 3/8" 10'-0"
EX-1005
22'-9 1/2"
19'-0"
EX-1009
EX-1004
1003

ENTRY PEDESTAL, KONX
BOX MODEL #3200 SERIES
FEC
FEC
FE
FE
FE

ENTRY PEDESTAL

PHYSICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN

CIRCULATION PATH AND VEHICULAR
TRAFFIC PER CBC 11B-250.1
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

REQUIRED & PROPOSED
3RD LEVEL SETBACK
01 A5.15
11 A5.15
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015 2016 2017 2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
ST - 202 203
204
205
206 207

SMOKE CONTAINMENT

TO COMPLY WITH
ESR-1136 & ICC-ES AC 77
2HR RATED

ENCLOSURE FOR

FUEL LINES

OFFICE SPACE

ELEVATOR ELEVATOR LOBBY
STAIR 1

MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM

JC VESTIBULE

ELECTRICAL ROOM

MEP SHAFT ROOM
STAIR 2

EXTERIOR TERRACE
ST - 201
2023
EX-2001
FEC
FE
FE
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3c
Third Floor
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
A5.01
01 A5.02
03 A5.01
03 01
A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12
A5.02
01 10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

SMOKE CONTAINMENT

TO COMPLY WITH
ESR-1136 & ICC-ES AC 77
STAIR 2 MEP SHAFT

ELEC RM

MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM

OFFICE SPACE

ELEVATOR
STAIR 1

ELEVATOR LOBBBY

EXTERIOR TERRACE

EXTERIOR TERRACE
2HR RATED

ENCLOSURE FOR

FUEL LINES
JC
ST - 301
EX-3002
EX-3001
3028
3029
EX-3003
FE
FE
FEC
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3d
Penthouse
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C

PAINTED STEEL CANOPY,

EXTENT ABOVE
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
A5.01
01 A5.02
03 A5.01
03 01
A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12

PLANTER
A5.02
01 10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

VERTICAL LADDER FOR

HIGH ROOF ACCESS
2'-0"

SMOKE CONTAINMENT

TO COMPLY WITH
ESR-1136 & ICC-ES AC 77

INTERIOR LUNCHROOM

MENS RESTROOM WOMENS RESTROOM

ELEVATOR CTRL RM

MEP SHAFT
STAIR 2
STAIR 1

EMERGENCY ELEC RM

ELEC RM

GENERATOR ROOM

ELEVATOR ELEVATOR LOBBY
JC

MECHANICAL ROOM

EXTERIOR TERRACE LUNCHROOM

PLANTER

PLANTER
EX-4001
EX-4002
EX-4006 EX-4007
ST - 401
409
4022 4023 4024 4025 4026
4027
4028
4029
4030
4031
4032
4033
4035 4034
EX-4003 EX-4005
EX-4004
FEC
FE
FE
FE
FE

DEDICATED OUTDOOR

AIR SUPPLY UNIT

EXHAUST

FAN EXHAUST
FAN

EXHAUST
FAN

CONDENSER
UNIT

CONDENSER
UNIT
2 Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3e
Roof
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
A5.01
01 A5.02
03 A5.01
03 01
A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"

ELEVATOR

OVERRUN
PV
PANELS

NOT IN SCOPE

PAINTED STEEL
CANOPY
A5.02
01 ROOF DECK BELOW
10'-0"
20'-0"

REQUIRED &

PROPOSED

REAR SETBACK

REQUIRED & PROPOSED
3RD LEVEL SETBACK
01 A5.15
11 A5.15
6'-0"
6'-0"
6'-0" 6'-0"
6'-0"
6'-0"

VERTICAL LADDER FOR HIGH

ROOF ACCESS

CONTRASTING YELLOW SAFETY WARNING

STRIPE FUSED TO PVC ROOFING
(6' - 0" FROM EDGE OF LOW PARAPET)

PLANTER
BELOW

OPEN GRATING
GT-1

OPEN GRATING
GT-1
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

ROOF PLAN -

HIGH ROOF
A2.06
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
ROOF PLAN - HIGH ROOF 01
No.: Description: Date:

CUP/ ZTA SET 06/10/2022
50% DD 06/24/2022
100% DD 07/29/2022

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3f
First Level Basement
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
AREA

ROTATION
AREA

ROTATION
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
01 A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12

BELOW GRADE STRUCTURE

LANDSCAPE SET BACK
>8' BELOW GRADE
2'-0"
CLEAR
2'-8 3/4"

BACKFLOW PREVENTER
6'-0"
01 A5.15
FENCE

WITH GATE
FENCE

WITH GATE,

MOVABLE BETWEEN GRID B AND C
11 A5.15
BIKE

STORAGE
(10)
B104
ST - B102 ST - B101
B103
B105
B106
B107

SUPPLY SHAFT

EXHAUST SHAFT

PARKING STORAGE
STAIR 2
STAIR 1

ELEVATOR PIT MPOE ROOM

CIRCULATION

CIRCULATION
2HR RATED

ENCLOSURE FOR

FUEL LINES
9'-0"
19'-0"
9'-0"
19'-0"
FE FE
VRC
SHAFT
VRC
SHAFT
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

RESPONSES
09/27/2022
50% CD 10/21/2022
75% CD DRAFT 11/18/2022
75% CD 12/09/2022
1 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 2
12/09/2022
2 CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT
RESPONSES 3
01/20/2023
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project Update
Exhibit 3g
Second Level Basement
Source: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP, February 2023

NOT TO SCALE
03/2023 JN 193676
VAN-EV
AREA

ROTATION
AREA

ROTATION
01 02 03 04 05 06
A
B
D
C
10'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
22'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0"
01 A5.13
01 A5.11
01 A5.14
01 A5.12
6'-0"

BELOW GRADE STRUCTURE

LANDSCAPE SET BACK
>8' BELOW GRADE
01 A5.15
FENCE

WITH GATE
11 A5.15

PERFORATED SCREEN

WITH ROLL-UP GATE
PER VOLLEY REQ.

ST - B202
B207
B206
ST - B201
B205
ST - B204 ST - B203

SUPPLY SHAFT

EXHAUST SHAFT
STAIR 2

MAINTENANCE BAY

STORAGE ROOM
STAIR 1

VESTIBULE

FUEL TANK ROOM

PARKING STORAGE
9'-0"
19'-0"
9'-0"
19'-0"
VRC
PIT
VRC
PIT

PIT DRAIN, TYP
RE: PLUMBING
FE FE
FE
Project No.:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Scale:

Sheet No.:

Sheet Name:

Seal & Signature:

Key Plan:

Issued For:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
IF THIS SHEET IS NOT 36"x48", IT IS A REDUCED PRINT - SCALE ACCORDINGLY 2" 1" 1/2" 1/4" 0
As indicated
Author
Checker
220570

CUP/ ZTA SET - COMMENT

GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
California is a substantial contributor of global greenhouse gases (GHGs), emitting over 420 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) per year.4
Methane (CH4) is also an important GHG that
potentially contributes to global climate change. GHGs are global in their effect, which is to increase the earth’s ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere. As primary GHGs have a long lifetime in the atmosphere, accumulate over time, and are generally well-mixed, their impact on the atmosphere is mostly independent of the point of emission. Every nation emits GHGs and as a result makes an incremental cumulative contribution to global climate change; therefore, global cooperation will be required to reduce the rate of GHG emissions enough to slow or stop the human-caused increase in average global temperatures and associated changes in climatic conditions.

The impact of human activities on global climate change is apparent in the observational record. Air trapped by ice has been extracted from core samples taken from polar ice sheets to determine the global atmospheric variation of CO2, CH4, and nitrous oxide (N2O) from before the start of industrialization (approximately 1750), to over 650,000 years ago. For that period, it was found that CO2 concentrations ranged from 180 to 300 parts per million (ppm). For the period from approximately 1750 to the present, global CO2 concentrations increased from a pre-industrialization period concentration of 280 to 379 ppm in 2005, with the 2005 value far exceeding the upper end of the pre-industrial period range. As of May 2020, the highest monthly average concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere was recorded at 417 ppm.5 The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) constructed several emission trajectories of GHGs needed to stabilize global temperatures and climate change impacts. It concluded that a stabilization of GHGs at 400 to 450 ppm carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e)6 concentration is required to keep global mean warming below 2 degrees Celsius (ᵒC), which in turn is assumed to be necessary to avoid dangerous climate change.

REGULATIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Federal
To date, no national standards have been established for nationwide GHG reduction targets, nor have any regulations or legislation been enacted specifically to address climate change and GHG emissions reduction at the project level. Various efforts have been promulgated at the federal level to improve fuel economy and energy efficiency to address climate change and its associated effects.

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (December 2007), among other key measures, requires the following, which would aid in the reduction of national GHG emissions:
4 California Air Resources Board, California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2017, https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/pubs/reports/2000_2017/ghg_inventory_trends_00-17.pdf, accessed May 6, 2020. 5 Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Carbon Dioxide Concentration at Mauna Loa Observatory, https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/, accessed February 27, 2023. 6 Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2e) – A metric measure used to compare the emissions from various greenhouse gases based upon their global warming potential.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 7
• Increase the supply of alternative fuel sources by setting a mandatory Renewable Fuel Standard requiring fuel producers to use at least 36 billion gallons of biofuel in 2022. • Set a target of 35 miles per gallon for the combined fleet of cars and light trucks by model year 2020 and direct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to establish a fuel economy program for medium- and heavy-duty trucks and create a separate fuel economy standard for work trucks.
• Prescribe or revise standards affecting regional efficiency for heating and cooling products and procedures for new or amended standards, energy conservation, energy efficiency labeling for consumer electronic products, residential boiler efficiency, electric motor efficiency, and home appliances.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Endangerment Finding. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to regulate GHG emissions stems from the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA (2007). The Supreme Court ruled that GHGs meet the definition of air pollutants under the existing Clean Air Act and must be regulated if these gases could be reasonably anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. Responding to the Court’s ruling, the EPA finalized an endangerment finding in December 2009. Based on scientific evidence it found that six GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, hydrofluorocarbons [HFCs], perfluorocarbons [PFCs], and sulfur hexafluoride [SF6]) constitute a threat to public health and welfare. Thus, it is the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the existing Act and the EPA’s assessment of the scientific evidence that form the basis for the EPA’s regulatory actions.

Presidential Executive Order 13783. Presidential Executive Order 13783, Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth (March 28, 2017), orders all federal agencies to apply cost-benefit analyses to regulations of GHG emissions and evaluations of the social cost of carbon, nitrous oxide, and methane.

State
The State of California has adopted various administrative initiatives and legislation relating to climate change, much of which set aggressive goals for GHG emissions reductions statewide. Although lead agencies must evaluate climate change and GHG emissions of projects subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines do not require or suggest specific methodologies for performing an assessment or specific thresholds of significance and do not specify GHG reduction mitigation measures. Instead, the guidelines allow lead agencies to choose methodologies and make significance determinations based on substantial evidence, as discussed in further detail below. No state agency has promulgated binding regulations for analyzing GHG emissions, determining their significance, or mitigating significant effects in CEQA documents. Thus, lead agencies exercise their discretion in determining how to analyze GHGs.

California Global Warming Solutions Act (Assembly Bill 32). The primary act that has driven GHG regulation and analysis in California include the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill [AB] 32) (Health and Safety Code Sections 38500, 38501, 28510, 38530, 38550, 38560, 38561–38565, 38570, 38571, 38574, 38580, 38590, 38592–38599), which instructs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop and enforce regulations for the reporting and verifying of statewide GHG emissions. The act directed CARB to set a GHG emissions limit based on 1990 levels, to be achieved by 2020. The bill set a timeline for adopting a scoping plan for achieving GHG reductions in a 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 8
technologically and economically feasible manner. The heart of the bill is the requirement that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020.

CARB Scoping Plan. On December 11, 2008, CARB adopted its Scoping Plan, which functions as a roadmap to achieve GHG reductions in California required by AB 32 through subsequently enacted regulations.

CARB’s Scoping Plan contains the main strategies California will implement to reduce GHG emissions by 174 MMTCO2e, or approximately 30 percent, from the State’s projected 2020 emissions level of 596 MMTCO2e under a business-as-usual (BAU)7 scenario. This is a reduction of 42 MMTCO2e, or almost ten percent, from 2002 to 2004 average emissions, but requires the reductions in the face of population and economic growth through 2020.

CARB’s Scoping Plan calculates 2020 BAU emissions as the emissions that would be expected to occur in the absence of any GHG reduction measures. The 2020 BAU emissions estimate was derived by projecting emissions from a past baseline year using growth factors specific to each of the different economic sectors (e.g., transportation, electrical power, commercial and residential, industrial, etc.). CARB used three-year average emissions, by sector, for 2002 to 2004 to forecast emissions to 2020. When CARB’s Scoping Plan process was initiated, 2004 was the most recent year for which actual data was available. The measures described in CARB’s Scoping Plan are intended to reduce the projected 2020 BAU to 1990 levels, as required by AB 32.

AB 32 requires CARB to update the Scoping Plan at least once every five years. CARB adopted the first major update to the Scoping Plan on May 22, 2014. The updated Scoping Plan identifies the actions California has already taken to reduce GHG emissions and focuses on areas where further reductions could be achieved to help meet the 2020 target established by AB 32. The Scoping Plan update also looks beyond 2020 toward the 2050 goal, established in Executive Order S-3-05, and observes that “a mid-term Statewide emission limit will ensure that the State stays on course to meet our long-term goal.” On January 20, 2017, CARB released the proposed Second Update to the Scoping Plan, which identifies the State’s post-2020 reduction strategy. The Second Update reflects the 2030 target of a 40 percent reduction below 1990 levels, set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update establishes a new Statewide emissions limit of 260 million MTCO2e for the year 2030, which corresponds to a 40 percent decrease in 1990 levels by 2030.

On December 15, 2022, CARB released the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan), which identifies the strategies achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier. The 2022 Scoping Plan contains the GHG reductions, technology, and clean energy mandated by statutes. The 2022 Scoping Plan was developed to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 through a substantial reduction in fossil fuel dependence, while at the same time increasing deployment of efficient non-combustion technologies and distribution of clean energy. The plan would also reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) and would include mechanical CO2 capture and sequestration actions, as well as emissions and sequestration from natural and working lands and nature-based strategies. Under 2022 Scoping Plan, by 2045, California aims to cut GHG emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels, reduce smog-forming air pollution by 71 percent, reduce the demand for liquid petroleum by 94 percent compared to current usage, improve health and welfare, and create millions of new jobs. This plan also builds upon current and 7 “Business-as-Usual” refers to emissions that would be expected to occur in the absence of GHG reductions. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/bau.htm. Note that there is significant controversy as to what BAU means. In determining the GHG 2020 limit, CARB used the above as the “definition.” It is broad enough to allow for design features to be counted as reductions.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 9
previous environmental justice efforts to integrate environmental justice directly into the plan, to ensure that all communities can reap the benefits of this transformational plan. Specifically, this plan:
• Identifies a path to keep California on track to meet its SB 32 GHG reduction target of at least 40 percent below 1990 emissions by 2030.
• Identifies a technologically feasible, cost-effective path to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 and a reduction in anthropogenic emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels. • Focuses on strategies for reducing California’s dependency on petroleum to provide consumers with clean energy options that address climate change, improve air quality, and support economic growth and clean sector jobs.
• Integrates equity and protecting California’s most impacted communities as driving principles throughout the document.
• Incorporates the contribution of natural and working lands (NWL) to the State’s GHG emissions, as well as their role in achieving carbon neutrality.
• Relies on the most up-to-date science, including the need to deploy all viable tools to address the existential threat that climate change presents, including carbon capture and sequestration, as well as direct air capture.
• Evaluates the substantial health and economic benefits of taking action. • Identifies key implementation actions to ensure success.

Achieving the 2045 target under the updated Scoping Plan will also spur the transformation of the California economy and fix its course securely on achieving an 80 percent reduction in GHG emissions by 2050, consistent with the global consensus of the scale of reductions needed to stabilize atmospheric GHG concentrations at 450 ppm CO2e and reduce the likelihood of catastrophic climate change. Currently, global levels are at just above 400 ppm. Table 1, California State Climate Change Legislation, provides a brief overview of other California legislation relating to climate change that may affect emissions associated with the proposed project.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 10
Table 1
California State Climate Change Legislation
Legislation Description
Assembly Bill 1493
and Advanced
Clean Cars
Program
Assembly Bill 1493 (“the Pavley Standard”) (Health and Safety Code Sections 42823 and 43018.5) aims to reduce GHG emissions from noncommercial passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks of model years 2009 to 2016. By 2025, when all rules will be fully implemented, new automobiles will emit 34 percent fewer CO2e emissions and 75 percent fewer smog-forming emissions.

Low Carbon Fuel
Standard
Executive Order S-01-07 (2007) requires a 10 percent or greater reduction in the average fuel carbon intensity for transportation fuels in California. The regulation took effect in 2010 and is codified at Title 17, California Code of Regulations, Sections 95480–95490. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard will reduce GHG emissions by reducing the carbon intensity of transportation fuels used in California by at least 10 percent by 2020.

Renewables
Portfolio Standard
(Senate Bill X1-2,
Senate Bill 350,
and Senate Bill
100)
California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires retail sellers of electric services to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020. The 33 percent standard is consistent with the RPS goal established in the Scoping Plan. The passage of Senate Bill 350 in 2015 updates the RPS to require the amount of electricity generated and sold to retail customers per year from eligible renewable energy resources to be increased to 50 percent by December 31, 2030. The bill will make other revisions to the RPS program and to certain other requirements on public utilities and publicly owned electric utilities. The passage of Senate Bill 100 in 2018 further requires achieving 60 percent renewable energy resources target by 2030, and 100 percent renewable energy resources target by 2045.

Senate Bill 375* SB 375 took effect in 2008 and provides a new planning process to coordinate land use planning, regional transportation plans, and funding priorities to help California meet the GHG reduction goals established in AB

32. SB 375 requires metropolitan planning organizations to incorporate a sustainable communities’ strategy in their regional transportation plans that will achieve GHG emissions reduction targets by reducing vehicle miles traveled from light-duty vehicles through the development of more compact, complete, and efficient communities. SB 375 requires CARB to periodically update the targets, no later than every 8 years. CARB is in the process of updating targets, with the intent to make them effective in 2018. Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCSs) adopted in 2018 would be subject to the updated targets.

California Building
Energy Efficiency
Standards
In general, the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards require the design of building shells and building components to conserve energy. The California Energy Commission updates the Building Energy Efficiency Standards every three years by working with stakeholders in a public and transparent process. The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards contained in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6 (also known as the California Energy Code) took effect on January 1, 2023. The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards are more efficient than previous standards for residential construction and once rooftop solar electricity generation is factored in, homes built under the 2022 standards will use less energy than those under the 2019 standards.

California Green
Building Standards
The California Green Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11), commonly referred to as the CALGreen Code, is a statewide mandatory construction code developed and adopted by the California Building Standards Commission and the Department of Housing and Community Development.

The CALGreen standards require new residential and commercial buildings to comply with mandatory measures under the topics of planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency/conservation, material conservation and resource efficiency, and environmental quality. CALGreen also provides voluntary tiers and measures that local governments may adopt that encourage or require additional measures in the five green building topics. The most recent update to the CALGreen Code went into effect January 1, 2023.

Senate Bill 32
(Amendments to
California Global
Warming Solutions
Act of 2006:

Emission Limit)
Signed into law in September 2016, SB 32 codifies the 2030 target in the recent Executive Order B-30-15.

The bill authorizes the state board to adopt an interim GHG emissions level target to be achieved by 2030.

SB 32 states that the intent is for the legislature and appropriate agencies to adopt complementary policies which ensure that the long-term emissions reductions advance specified criteria. In November 2022, CARB approved the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan) that provides guidance for compliance with SB 32.
*Senate Bill 375 is codified at Government Code Sections 65080, 65400, 65583, 65584.01, 65584.02, 65584.04, 65587, 65588, 14522.1, 14522.2, and 65080.01, as well as at Public Resources Code Sections 21061.3 and 21159.28 and Chapter 4.2. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 11
Regional
South Coast Air Quality Management District
In 2008, SCAQMD released draft guidance regarding interim CEQA GHG significance thresholds.8 Within
its October 2008 document, the SCAQMD proposed the use of a percent emission reduction target to determine significance for commercial/residential projects that emit greater than 3,000 MTCO2e per year.

Under this proposal, commercial/residential projects that emit fewer than 3,000 MTCO2e per year would be assumed to have a less than significant impact on climate change. On December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted the staff proposal for an interim GHG significance threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e per year for stationary source/industrial projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency. However, the SCAQMD has yet to adopt a GHG significance threshold for application by local lead agencies in their review of land use development projects (e.g., residential/commercial projects).

Local
City of Beverly Hills
Beverly Hills General Plan
The City of Beverly Hills General Plan (General Plan), adopted in January 2010, contains the following goals related to GHG emission reduction.

Land Use Element
Goal LU 14 - Environmental Sustainability and Carbon Footprint: Lan uses and built form that are environmentally sustainable by minimizing consumption of scarce resources, pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, wastes, and exposure of residents and visitors to toxics and hazards.

Open Space Element
Goal OS 7 - Improved Air Quality: Improved health and sustainability of the community through improved regional air quality and reduced greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change.

Objective OS 7.9: Work with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the SCAQMD to comply with statewide greenhouse gas reduction goals as established in AB 32 and other subsequent legislation.

Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan
The Climate Change and Air Quality Element of the Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan (SCP)9 includes goals and policies related to air quality. The following goal, objective, and policy is applicable to the proposed 8 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Draft Guidance Document—Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold, October 2008. 9 City of Beverly Hills, Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan¸ February 17, 2009, http://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/24347783778629768/SustainableCityPlan.pdf, accessed February 27, 2023. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 12
project:

Goal: Combat climate change and improve air quality.
• Policy 2.2: Minimize mobile source emissions from on and off-road (construction) vehicles.

In addition, the Energy Element of the Beverly Hills SCP includes goals and policies related to energy use.

The following goal, objective, and policies are applicable to the proposed project:

Goal: Encourage the use of energy in a clean and efficient manner and the use of renewable energy sources.
• Policy 3.2: Maximize the use of renewable energy generating systems and other energy efficient technologies on City, other agency, residential, and commercial buildings.

CEQA THRESHOLDS
The environmental analysis in this memorandum is patterned after the Initial Study Checklist recommended by the CEQA Guidelines, as amended. The issues presented in the Initial Study Checklist have been utilized as thresholds of significance in this section. Accordingly, a project may create a significant environmental impact if it causes one or more of the following to occur:
• Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment (refer to Impact GHG-1); and/or • Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases (refer to Impact GHG-2).

Methodology
The City has not adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing impacts related to GHG emissions. Similarly, the SCAQMD, CARB, or any other State or regional agency have not yet adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing GHG emissions that is applicable to the project. Since there is no applicable adopted or accepted numerical threshold of significance for GHG emissions, the methodology for evaluating the project’s impacts related to GHG emissions focuses on its consistency with statewide, regional, and local plans adopted for the purpose of reducing and/or mitigating GHG emissions. This evaluation of consistency with such plans is the sole basis for determining the significance of the project’s GHG-related impacts on the environment.

Notwithstanding, for informational purposes, the analysis also calculates the amount of GHG emissions that would be attributable to the project using recommended air quality models, as described below. The primary purpose of quantifying the project’s GHG emissions is to satisfy State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(a), which calls for a good-faith effort to describe and calculate emissions. The estimated emissions inventory is also used to determine if there would be a reduction in the project’s incremental contribution of GHG emissions because of compliance with regulations and requirements adopted to implement plans for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions. However, the significance of the project’s GHG emissions impacts is not based on the amount of GHG emissions resulting from the project. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 13

IMPACT ANALYSIS
Impact GHG-1: Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Impact GHG-2: Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Project-Related Sources of Greenhouse Gases
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would result in direct and indirect emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4, and would not result in other GHGs that would facilitate a meaningful analysis. Therefore, this analysis focuses on these three forms of GHG emissions. Direct project-related GHG emissions include emissions from construction activities, area sources, and mobile sources, while indirect sources include emissions from energy consumption, water demand, and solid waste generation. The most recent version of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2022.1.1.5, as well as the CARB’s EMission FACtor Model (EMFAC 2021), was used to calculate direct and indirect project related GHG emissions. Additionally, the project would not consume natural gas on-site. Table 2, Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions, presents the estimated CO2, N2O, and CH4 emissions of the proposed project.

CalEEMod outputs are contained within Appendix A, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data.

Table 2
Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Source6
CO2 CH4 N2O
Total Metric
Tons of
CO2e3 Metric
Tons/year1
Metric
Tons/year1
Metric
Tons of
CO2e2
Metric
Tons/year1
Metric
Tons of
CO2e2
Direct Emissions
• Construction5 28.83 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 28.85
• Area Source 0.67 <0.01 0.13 <0.01 1.50 2.30
• Mobile Source4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total Direct Emissions3 29.50 <0.01 0.13 <0.01 1.51 31.15 Indirect Emissions
• Energy 46.1 <0.01 0.13 <0.01 1.50 47.73
• Solid Waste 0.54 0.05 1.30 0.00 0.00 1.84
• Water Demand 4.09 0.07 1.80 <0.01 1.50 7.39
Total Indirect Emissions3 50.73 0.12 3.23 <0.01 3.00 56.96 Total Project-Related Emissions3 88.10 MTCO2e/yr
Notes:

MTCO2e = Metric Tons Carbon Dioxide Equivalent

1. Emissions calculated using the CalEEMod version 2022.1.1.5. and the EMFAC 2021.

2. Carbon dioxide equivalent values calculated using the EPA Website, Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator, https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhousegas-equivalencies-calculator, accessed February 27, 2023.

3. Totals may be slightly off due to rounding.

Refer to Appendix A, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data, for detailed model input/output data. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 14
Direct Project-Related Source of Greenhouse Gases
Construction Emissions. Construction GHG emissions are amortized (i.e., total construction emissions divided by the lifetime of the project, assumed to be 30 years), 10 then added to the operational emissions.

As seen in Table 2, construction of the proposed project would result in a total of 28.85 MTCO2e (amortized over 30 years) which represents a total of approximately 865.43 MTCO2e from construction activities.

Area Source. The project would result in nominal area source emissions; refer to Table 2. Area source emissions would be generated from consumer products, architectural coating, and landscaping. As shown in Table 2, the project would result in 2.30 MTCO2e/year of area source emissions.

Mobile Source Emissions. According to the 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis Beverly Hills – California developed by Coco Traffic Planners, Inc. (dated October 4, 2022)
11, typical daily activities are forecast to generate 281 average daily trips, including 51 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 31 trips during the p.m. peak hour. The proposed project would result in a net decrease in traffic generation as the existing development generates 484 average daily trips, resulting in a net negative of 203 daily trips. The CalEEMod modeled zero daily trip for the project as a conservative analysis. Therefore, the project would not generate mobile source emissions over existing condition; refer to Table 2.

Indirect Project-Related Source of Greenhouse Gases
Energy Consumption. Energy consumption emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod model and project-specific land use data. Electricity would be provided to the project site via Southern California Edison (SCE). The project would indirectly result in 47.73 MTCO2e/year of GHG emissions due to energy consumption; refer to Table 2.

Water Demand. The proposed project’s operations would result in a demand of approximately 2.3 million gallons of water per year. Emissions from indirect energy impacts due to water supply would result in

7.39 MTCO2e/year; refer to Table 2.

Solid Waste. Solid waste associated with operations of the proposed project would result in 1.84 MTCO2e/year; refer to Table 2.

Total Project-Related Sources of Greenhouse Gases
As shown in Table 2, the total amount of proposed project-related GHG emissions from direct and indirect sources combined would total 88.10 MTCO2e/yr.
10 In accordance with the SCAQMD guidance, projected GHGs from construction have been quantified and amortized over 30 years, which is the number of years considered to represent the life of the project. The amortized construction emissions are added to the annual average operational emissions. 11 Coco Traffic Planners, Inc., 8366 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis, October 4, 2022.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 15
Consistency with Applicable GHG Plans, Policies, or Regulations Climate Change Scoping Plan
The goal to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (Executive Order S-3-05) was codified by the Legislature as the 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32). In 2008, CARB approved a Scoping Plan as required by AB 32.12 The Scoping Plan has a range of GHG reduction actions which include direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, market-based mechanisms such as a cap-and-trade system, and an AB 32 implementation fee to fund the program.

The 2022 Scoping Plan identifies reduction measures necessary to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier. Actions that reduce GHG emissions are identified for each AB 32 inventory sector.

Provided in Table 3, Consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan: AB 32 GHG Inventory Sectors, is an evaluation of applicable reduction actions/strategies by emissions source category to determine how the project would be consistent with or exceed reduction actions/strategies outlined in the 2022 Scoping Plan.

Table 3
Consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan: AB 32 Inventory Sectors Actions and Strategies Project Consistency Analysis
Smart Growth / Vehicles Miles Traveled (VMT)
Reduce VMT per capita to 25% below 2019 levels by 2030, and 30% below 2019 levels by 2045.

Consistent. According to Automated Parking Analysis,
the project would generate net negative daily trip
generation compared to existing condition. Additionally, the project would be within 0.07 miles of transit station, provide bicycle parking spaces, electric vehicle charging station, and vanpool/carpool parking which would
promote alternative mode of transportation and reduce
VMT. As such, the project would be consistent with the
strategy.

New Residential and Commercial Buildings
All electric appliances beginning 2026 (residential) and 2029 (commercial), contributing to 6 million heat pumps installed statewide by 2030.

Consistent. The project would not use natural gas onsite. Therefore, the project is consistent with this action.

Source: California Air Resources Board, 2022 Scoping Plan, November 16, 2022.

Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan
The City adopted the SCP, which contains goals intended to support sustainable development within the City. Implementation of this plan would contribute to a reduction in the City’s overall GHG emissions.

Furthermore, the City’s General Plan, adopted in 2010, contains several goals related to GHG emission reduction. Table 4, Project Consistency with Applicable Goals and Policies of the Beverly Hills General Plan and Sustainable City Plan, comparesthe proposed project to applicable policies from the SCP and General Plan.
12 Climate Change Proposed Scoping Plan was approved by the California Air Resources Board on December 11, 2008.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 16
Table 4
Project Consistency with Applicable Goals and Policies of the Beverly Hills General Plan and Sustainable City Plan Goal/Policy Project Consistency
City of Beverly Hills General Plan
Land Use Element
LU-14 (Environmental Sustainability and Carbon Footprint): Land uses and built form that are environmentally sustainable by minimizing consumption of scarce resources, pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, wastes, and exposure of residents and visitors to toxics and hazards.

Consistent
The project would involve demolishing the existing single-story commercial building and surface parking lot and constructing an approximately 32,811-gross square feet (25,566-net square feet) commercial building with three floors of office/retail spaces, a penthouse/rooftop, and two levels of basement parking The basement parking would accommodate 76 parking spaces.

The City adopted the California Green Building Standards Code as BHMC Section 9-1-1101, Adoption of the California Green Building Standards Code, which requires new buildings to implement sustainability techniques related to site development,
indoor/outdoor water use, material conservation, etc. The proposed project would comply with BHMC and the 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, more energy efficient than the existing building. Additionally, the project would exceed title 24 standard by

6.1 percent. As such, the project would be consistent with the goal.

Open Space Element
OS 7 (Improved Air Quality): Improved health and sustainability of the community through improved regional air quality and reduced greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change.

OS 7.9: Work with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the SCAQMD to comply with statewide greenhouse gas
reduction goals as established in AB 32 and other subsequent legislation.

Consistent
Refer to Table 3 consistency with the AB 32 and the Scoping Plan, as well as the discussion under Land Use Element LU-14
(Environmental Sustainability and Carbon Footprint). As such, the project would be consistent with the goal.

City of Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan
Climate Change and Air Quality
Combat climate change and improve air quality.

Energy
Encourage the use of energy in a clean and efficient manner and the use of renewable energy sources.

Consistent
The proposed project would comply with the 2022 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which is more energy efficient than the existing building, through environmentally- sensitive architecture and building systems. The project would also install solar-ready roof. The project would include energy-efficient lighting and all electric landscape equipment. Additionally, the project would not consume natural gas on-site. As such, the project would be consistent with the goal.

Land Use, Transportation, and Open Space
Foster an energy-efficient, walkable community that provides ample goods, services, and benefits to all residents while respecting the local environment.

Consistent
The proposed project is an infill development located within CARBdesignated Central Business District. 1 The project site is located
within a quarter-mile of access to public transportation (Metro Rapid Bus Stop for bus lines 20/720 and a future Metro Purple Line Subway Stop) and other destinations, including off-site residential, restaurants, and retail. Therefore, walking or bicycling would be viable modes of transportation to reach numerous destinations or public transit. Additionally, the project would provide bicycle parking 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 17
Table 4
Project Consistency with Applicable Goals and Policies of the Beverly Hills General Plan and Sustainable City Plan Goal/Policy Project Consistency
spaces, electric vehicle charging station, vanpool/carpool parking, which would promote alternative mode of transportation. As such, the project would be consistent with the goal.

Notes:

1. California Air Resources Board, Distance to Central Business District, https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/auctionproceeds/kml/jobcentermap.htm, accessed February 27, 2023.

Sources:

California Building Standards Commission, 2022 Nonresidential and Multifamily Compliance Manual - Individual Chapters and Appendices, https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-building-energy-efficiency-6, accessed March 1, 2023.

City of Beverly Hills, Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan, February 17, 2009.

City of Beverly Hills, City of Beverly Hills General Plan, April 30, 2010.

Conclusion
In summary, the project’s location and land use characteristics render it consistent with statewide and regional climate change mandates, plans, policies, and recommendations. More specifically, the GHG plan consistency analysis provided above demonstrates that the project complies with the regulations and GHG reduction actions/strategies outlined in the General Plan, SCP, and Scoping Plan. Consistency with these plans would reduce the impact of the project’s incremental contribution of GHG emissions.

Accordingly, the project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, regulation, or recommendation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Therefore, impacts regarding climate change would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 18

REFERENCES
Documents

1. California Air Resources Board, 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/2022-sp.pdf, November 2022.

2. California Air Resources Board, California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2017, https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/pubs/reports/2000_2017/ghg_inventory_trends_00-

17.pdf, accessed February 28, 2023.

3. California Building Standards Commission, 2022 Nonresidential and Multifamily Compliance Manual - Individual Chapters and Appendices, https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-andtopics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-building-energy-efficiency-6, accessed March 1, 2023.

4. California Energy Commission, 2013 California Energy Efficiency Potential and Goals Study, Appendix Volume I, August 15, 2013.

5. City of Beverly Hills, City of Beverly Hills General Plan, April 30, 2010.

6. City of Beverly Hills, City of Beverly Hills General Plan Map LU1 General Plan Land Use Designations, January 25, 2022.

7. City of Beverly Hills, Beverly Hills Sustainable City Plan, February 17, 2009.

8. City of Beverly Hills, City of Beverly Hills Zoning Map, October 2008.

9. Coco Traffic Planners, Inc., 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Office Building Development Project Automated Parking Analysis Beverly Hills -- California, October 4, 2022.

10. Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Carbon Dioxide Concentration at Mauna Loa Observatory, https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/, accessed February 27, 2023.

11. Southern California Edison, The Clean Power and Electrification Pathway, https://newsroom.edison.com/internal_redirect/cms.ipressroom.com.s3.amazonaws.com/166/ files/20187/g17-pathway-to-2030-white-paper.pdf, accessed February 27, 2023.

12. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Draft Guidance Document—Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold, October 2008. 8633 Wilshire Boulevard Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Memorandum 19
Websites / Programs

1. California Air Resources Board, Distance to Central Business District, https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/auctionproceeds/kml/jobcentermap.htm, accessed February 27, 2023.

2. EPA Website, Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator, https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator.

3. Google Earth, 2023.

4. South Coast Air Quality Management District, California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2022.1.1.5.

Appendix A
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report, 2/24/2023
1 / 80
Beverly Hills 2 Detailed Report
Table of Contents