Burbank City Council
September 27, 2022

the Project includes minor updates to the Safety, Land Use, Open Space and Conservation, Air Quality and Climate Change, Noise, and Mobility Elements, and the incorporation of environmental justice policies into the City’s Burbank2035 General Plan. Please provide an annotated copy of the pages of these elements showing the intended updates and additions and deletions thereto. As written, the Project description is inadequate because it fails to provide a description of these changes, or to provide annotated copies of the updated Elements as linked documents or attachments.

It is therefore not possible for the public to assess the accuracy of the impact analysis.

of 8,800 units under the RHNA that was conducted for the Housing Element Update.

However, it was determined that the EIR would analyze 10,456 units to account for the 2029 interpolated housing growth assumed under the two Specific Plans along with the City’s RHNA allocation. Therefore, the NOP was recirculated on March 17, 2021, with the higher number.” Please explain why Specific Plan development was not addressed as part of the cumulative impact analysis and was instead included as part of the analysis of the proposed Project. Why was the anticipated residential development associated with the two Specific Plan not counted towards achievement of the RHNA allocation, rather than added to the RHNA allocation? Have the impacts of the two Specific Plans –which should be referred to by name - previously received environmental review, and if so when, what are their associated State Clearinghouse Numbers, and what are the hyperlinks to those documents, and when were those Specific Plans approved?

DEIR was published. It should be noted that an accurate and stable project description is a fundamental requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

Given that there have been changes to the Project, recirculation of a full EIR, rather than just a focused RDEIR part should have occurred.

Project Description

RDEIR’s cumulative impacts analysis need to be specific about cumulative development included in the analysis and the cumulative impact of the Project in combination with the up-zoning occurring throughout the region as part of Housing Element updates and other changes in State law.
3-92
ATTACHMENT 12-377

2.5.2 Either in this section, or as part of the cumulative impact analysis, the RDEIR should include a table like Table 2-1 which give the RHNA allocation of the region and for adjoining cities.

To make up for this shortfall of 1,203 units, the Housing Element includes a housing program to rezone additional opportunity sites through adoption of two specific plan projects: the Downtown Transit-Oriented-Development Specific Plan (Downtown TOD) and the Golden State Specific Plan (GSSP) (see Figure 2-3 for the Specific Plan locations and opportunity sites). Adoption of these Specific Plans will provide the necessary zoning, objective development standards, and processing procedures to facilitate the production of the shortfall of housing units required to accommodate the City’s RHNA during the Housing Element planning period. The zone changes required by these Specific Plans will be adopted in 2022-2023, or within three years of the start of the planning period as required by State law.

So, will these Specific Plans have separate EIRs or is this the EIR for those Specific Plans? If this EIR is the EIR for these two Specific Plans, then Specific Plan-specific analysis need to be included in this EIR, along with Specific Plan- specific mitigation measures. As written, this EIR (DEIR and RDEIR) is inadequate as an EIR for adoption of these two Specific Plans as it contains only program-level analysis. If separate EIRs are being prepared for the two Specific Plans, please provide links and information on the environmental analysis being prepared for these Specific Plans.

Table 2-4 Since the proposed Project includes rezoning of identified sites, more site-specific impacts analysis should be included for those sites in both the DEIR and RDEIR. No such zone changes should be approved without site-specific level environmental analysis.

Environmental Justice Update. As written the descriptions are too general to allow the reader to be able to assess whether the impacts of the changes have been accurately assessed.

Biological Resources
The RDEIR at page 1-3 states that the Biological Resources section haa been revised to address comments by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on the Draft EIR, which indicate that development under the proposed Project may result in adverse impacts to the least Bell’s vireo, bat species, and monarch butterflies through vegetation and tree removal. It would be helpful if the RDEIR included a copy of that letter in an Appendix so that the public can see CDFW’s concerns and assess whether the RDEIR has adequately addressed them.

the abundance and diversity of biological resources that are present and those that may 3-93
ATTACHMENT 12-378
be affected by the proposed project. As such, the biological resources addressed in this section are limited to nesting birds, bats, raptors, and their habitats.” It therefore appears that the RDEIR is not responsive to CDFW comments, including comments regarding monarch butterflies.

development which is in hillside areas at the base of the Verdugo Mountains. The RDEIR acknowledges that “(t)he Verdugo Mountains provide important habitat connectivity for many plant and animal species,” but fails to address the potential biological resource impacts of development on vacant residential parcels in these sensitive areas or Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) development under the Housing Element which may reduce hillside backyards and thus habitat connectivity and impact wildlife corridors.

This needs to be addressed in the EIR. Similarly, the RDEIR acknowledges that “(u)rbanization in the City has substantially reduced the abundance and diversity of biological resources, though landscaped areas such as street medians, parkways, and other green areas are located throughout the City and provide habitat for nesting birds and potentially other wildlife (City of Burbank 2013a),” yet fails to adequately address the impacts associated with increasing urbanization.

of impacts to sensitive species and riparian areas. Please provide a map showing the location of sensitive species identified in the California Natural Diversity Database, and thus the location where additional urbanization may result in impacts and compare these locations to the location of residential zoning in the City. Also provide a map showing the location of blue-line streams and other wetlands as compared to the location of residential zoning in the City.

Element.” Is this the same as buildout under the Housing Element? If not, then the analysis may not fully address Project impacts.

. . . based on comments provided by the CDFW on the Draft EIR, development under the proposed Project may result in adverse impacts to the following biological resources: least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), a federally and State- listed Endangered species, by causing nest abandonment, reproductive suppression, or incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings if development occurs during the breeding and nesting season; bat species, such as pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), big free tailed bat (Nyctinomops macrotis), and hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), which are designated as Species of Special Concern (SSC), by removal of trees, vegetation and/or structures that may provide roosting habitats; and monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) and monarch butterfly overwintering habitat through vegetation and tree removal. Therefore, construction activities have the potential to disturb biological resources, which would be a potentially significant impact.
3-94
ATTACHMENT 12-379
The RD EIR therefore only address impacts during construction, but fails to address impacts associated with the long-term loss of habitat resulting for increased urbanization. The biological resources analysis is very general, reads more like an Initial Study discussion, and fails to provide any real analysis of long-term impacts to species of concern. The analysis if therefore deficient. The potential for significant long-term impacts remains.

BIO-1 As written, the mitigation measures may not be practical. How will staff know if residential construction activities or other disturbances will occur in areas within 500 feet of a previously identified habitat or observation according to CNDDB or iNaturalist? Does the City have the necessary database to implement this mitigation measure as written? How frequently is the database updated? How will the findings of such biological assessments be entered into the database to keep it updated? Does this mitigation measure apply to any and all residential developments that will require a grading permit? Are there by-right developments that will escape the requirements of this mitigation? As written, it is not clear that the mitigation is feasible and that it will reduce impacts to a level considered less-than-significant. The potential for significant unmitigated impacts remains.

4.2.4 Page 4.2-7 states: “(t) The area to analyze cumulative biological resource impacts includes the City limits.” However, Housing Element Updates and associated up-zoning are being required throughout the region, resulting in region-wide impacts. Therefore, it is inappropriate to limit the cumulative impact analysis to the City limits. The analysis fails to indicate whether the cumulative impact analysis is based on a list or on forecasts and to provide the reader of the RDEIR with any information on the past, present and reasonably foreseeable development considered in the cumulative analysis. The analysis very general and is not support by substantial evidence. It is therefore fatally flawed and fails to support the contention that cumulative impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable. The analysis fails to address habitat loss, or impacts to species other than during nesting. The RDEIR need to include an analysis of the long- term cumulative impacts of increasing urbanization on sensitive species, habitat, and wildlife corridors. It fails to do this.

Utilities and Service Systems
See video of April 5, 2022 City Council meeting starting at time 3:49, wherein applicable experts discuss concerns regarding the potential impacts of increased development resulting from SB9 on the City’s sewage treatment, electrical and trash services. These concerns also apply to the proposed Project. The video is available at:
https://burbank.granicus.com/player/clip/9749?view_id=42&redirect=true&h=7b029dbc9a87f56019f40 7459b080012
This video provides support for the need for a detailed analysis of the potential impacts of the Housing Element and the impacts of the Housing Element in combination with cumulative development within and outside the City on utilities and service systems, and provides evidence that the analysis contained in the RDEIR is insufficient and fails to identify likely potential impacts, such as impacts to the electrical system.
3-95
ATTACHMENT 12-380

“outputs from the CalEEMod prepared for the proposed Project, as well as publicly available data and reports from the City of Burbank, Burbank Water and Power (BWP), and other publicly available sources of information.” Were any interviews conducted with experts from BWP and if not, why not? If so, they need to be properly referenced in the RDEIR. Given that Burbank has its own water and power company, and the age of some of the publicly available documents, failure to seek out expert opinion on these issues is one explanation for the poor analysis and lack of substantial evidence in support of the conclusions in this section.

Water Supply

what percent from groundwater. It also needs to explain how much recycled water is being used in the City.

have targets been met? If targets have not met, what are the factors that have impacted the ability to meet conservation targets?

please provide and link to the WSA prepared for the Project and a full citation for the document.

demand meets or exceeds supply given the proposed Project? A mitigation measure needs to be included for a public service/infrastructure impacts whereby a development moratorium is triggered when impact thresholds are approached.

the State which has resulted in a massive State-wide up-zoning? How does Plan development address increase demand by other users of the same water source? Was the Statewide reduction target of 20 percent in urban water use by the year 2020 met? If not, why not? What analysis has been done to address this?

address the fact that we are in a historic drought. The discussion of drought-related orders and declaration is stale and must be updated. Please discuss the degree to which reduction targets have/were met and any research regarding factors influencing the achievement of water reduction targets.
3-96
ATTACHMENT 12-381
Water supplies are predicted to decrease by 10 percent due to climate change1 as population and residential development continues to increase. How has this been addressed in the analysis of Project water impacts?

Update. See CEQA Guidelines Section 15150. Where is the document available? Please provide a link to the document and a summary of its contents as well as for the UWMPs for MWD and Burbank. All documents cited the RDEIR need to be properly referenced with links provided if available.

be required a serve anticipated Project demand:

Although all parcels in Burbank have access to public utility infrastructure, in some cases the infrastructure is older and in need of replacement or insufficient to meet the needs of a particular project. Pursuant to General Plan Land Use Policy 2.3, new development is required to pay for their share of upgrading the utility infrastructure as needed to serve their project. This may include installing larger water mains, new water meters, and/or upgrades to existing facilities.

Recent State law have made a number of housing projects by-right projects. How does this affect the ability of the City to get developers to fund “infrastructure improvements that are required to mitigate project impacts and have not been previously identified as part of a capital improvement program covered by the development impact fees.” To what degree is development that would occur as part of the proposed Project covered by existing development impact fees? Has additional infrastructure needs generated by this level of additional housing development yet been assessed? Is it captured in the existing fee structure? If so, please cite the documents in which the analysis is contained and provide links to those documents. If not, then the Project has the potential to result in significant unmitigated water conveyance system impacts which should be identified in the RDEIR.

The RDEIR states that:

As individual housing projects are proposed and considered for approval by the City, project proponents would be required to demonstrate that any identified system deficiencies reasonably related to the development project are adequately addressed by the responsible project proponent and future upgrades are designed in accordance with the BMC and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

Please provide facts and sources to support this contention. How will this work when housing developments are by right? What mechanism is in place to require that 1 https://calmatters.org/environment/2022/08/newsom-strategy-california-water-supply/ https://resources.ca.gov/-/media/CNRA-Website/Files/Initiatives/Water-Resilience/Final_California-Water- Resilience-Portfolio-2020_ADA3_v2_ay11-opt.pdf
https://resources.ca.gov/-/media/CNRA-Website/Files/Initiatives/Water-Resilience/CA-WRP-Progress-Report.pdf 3-97
ATTACHMENT 12-382
individual developments demonstrate that system deficiencies are adequately addressed. The RDEIR provides no support for this contention nor does it detail how this will be accomplished. While issuance of a building permit requires demonstration of sufficient fire flow pressure, the RDEIR fails to describe how this is accomplished when it comes to the water conveyance system.

Given that the RDEIR includes UTIL-1 to address the need for a study to determine wastewater conveyance infrastructure needs and an updated fee structure, why is no similar mitigation required when it comes to the water transmission system.

supply facilities would be less than significant” has not been supported by fact, reasonable assumptions predicated on facts, or expert opinion supported by facts. In fact, it is contrary to the conclusion of a very similar analysis of the impact of the Project on the wastewater conveyance system. Why are impacts to the water conveyance system classified as less than significant, but the impacts to the wastewater conveyance system significant (page 4.12.25), given the same level and type of general analysis, which would be clear from a side-by-side comparison of the two analyses? You shouldn’t be able to do the same type of general analysis and reach opposing conclusions for the two conveyance systems. This just illustrates the completely useless nature of the type of “analysis” conducted.

Why was BWP not consulted regarding the potential for water system impacts associated with this level of new development over the next 8 years and the agency’s ability to respond to that increased demand. Please consult with BWP and revise the RDEIR accordingly.

4.12-30 –

4.12-35 The proposed Project includes the construction of up to 10,456 housing units between 2021-2029. The 2030 estimates of water supply vs. water availability in the City’s 2020 Urban Water Master Plan “(UWMP) are based on a 2030 Housing Element goal of 10,088 units, as shown in Table 2-1 of the UWMP, not the 10,456 units in the Housing Element (proposed Project):2
The UWMP assumes a population of 2.46 persons per unit or 24,816 additional residents resulting from Housing Element development. This is shy of the 25,722 persons that would be added to the City under the Housing Element. 2 https://www.burbankwaterandpower.com/images/administrative/downloads/BWP_2020UWMP_Final.pdf 3-98
ATTACHMENT 12-383
The UW
MP thus underestimates water demand resulting from the proposed Project as shown in UWMP Tables 6-2 and 6-4, as reproduced below. Given that demand is underestimated for 2030, and supply exactly matches demand, correcting for the additional units/population results in water demand in excess of supply. Given that demand would exceed supply, when correcting for the number of housing units, the potential for significant water supply impacts exists.

The analysis also assumes that the City’s allocation of MWD treated water will increase over time, and that the water supply will be greater during a multi-year drought event, than during normal years. What are the bases for these assumptions? What is the flexibility in Burbank’s water allocation? As previously noted, the State anticipates that water supplies will decrease by 10 percent due to climate change3 as population and residential development continues to increase. This does not appear to be reflected in the UWMP.

Furthermore, as shown in Table 2-1, the total housing units would be significantly more than the SCAG forecasts. This is true for the region, as well as Burbank. The cumulative impact analysis needs to address the impact on water supplies of the Project in combination with the additional residential development being required throughout the region.

One of Burbank’s water sources is MWD, which includes 14 cities. The cumulative analysis needs to address the impact of the Project in combination with past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects in these 14 cities, including up-zoning and other actions to accelerate housing development. SCAG’s RHNA allocation for the region is 1,341,827.
4 The RDEIR cumulative analysis needs to address the number of additional units allocated to MWD customers and thus the cumulative increase in demand on MWD supplies. The RDEIR then needs to address whether this increase in demand will impact Burbank’s water allocation. Failure to provide this analysis is a fatal flaw of the RDEIR. In the absence of such an analysis any conclusion that water impacts will be less than significant cannot be supported.
3 https://calmatters.org/environment/2022/08/newsom-strategy-california-water-supply/ https://resources.ca.gov/-/media/CNRA-Website/Files/Initiatives/Water-Resilience/Final_California-Water- Resilience-Portfolio-2020_ADA3_v2_ay11-opt.pdf
https://resources.ca.gov/-/media/CNRA-Website/Files/Initiatives/Water-Resilience/CA-WRP-Progress-Report.pdf 4 https://scag.ca.gov/housing
3-99
ATTACHMENT 12-384

UWMP TABLES
3-100
ATTACHMENT 12-385
Wastewater

effluent is discharged into either the Burbank Western Channel or to the City’s recycled water distribution system. Where does it go once discharged into the Burbank Western Channel? Any downstream impacts associated with increased flows should be addressed in the RDEIR.

The discussion indicates that Burbank may divert wastewater to the Los Angeles sewer system. Under what conditions is this allowed? Is there a cap on the amount that can be diverted? In addition to treatment capacity information, please provide information on share of capacity currently in use.

were the key findings of the Burbank Sewer System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan in terms of capacity, share of capacity used and locations in the City more likely to experience capacity issues?

the water conveyance system impacts detailed above. The RDEIR acknowledges the potential for impacts, but assumes that impacts will be adequately addressed through a utility infrastructure fee and that a sewer capacity analysis would be required for individual projects. When was the existing impact fee developed, does it address the level of development anticipated in the Housing Element and if not how long will it take to prepare the analysis of likely required system upgrades and establish a new fee structure? Given the by-right nature of certain types of housing development pursuant to recent changes in State law, will the impacts of individual developments truly be addressed as described in the RDEIR? What are the likely short-term and long-term impacts of the Project, given the City’s likely need to identify system upgrades associated with the level of development included in the Housing Element recalculate its fee structure?

anticipated to improve the quality of stormwater runoff by replacing older development with new development that incorporates Low Impact Development (LID) methods.” To what degree does the Project result in redevelopment of properties verses infill development. If redevelopment is not a component of the Project then this statement should be removed from the RDEIR.

The RDEIR states that “while individual housing developments would include site- specific stormwater drainage and conveyance facilities, such facilities would be designed and built in accordance with the BMC and BMPs for stormwater management. Potential impacts related to relocation or construction of new wastewater conveyance facilities would be less than significant.” In reaching this conclusion the RDEIR relies on the contention that “Sections 9-3-413 and 9-3-414 of the BMC would ensure that future development projects resulting from the Housing and Safety Element Update would be implemented with appropriately sized and sited stormwater conveyance facilities.” The 3-101
ATTACHMENT 12-386
RDEIR fails to quote applicable portions of these code sections to support this contention. Section 9-3-413 relates to the adoption of the SUSMP.5 Section 9-3-414 – Storm Water Pollution Control Measure for Development Planning Part E – Storm Water Pollution Control Requirements requires:

1. A new single-family hillside home development shall include mitigation measures to:
a. Conserve natural areas;
b. Protect slopes and channels;
c. Provide storm drain system stenciling and signage;
d. Divert roof runoff to vegetated areas before discharge unless the diversion would result in slope instability; and
e. Direct surface flow to vegetated areas before discharge, unless the diversion would result in slope instability.

New single-family homes that are not located in hillside areas do not appear to be planning priority projects subject to these requirements (see BMC 9-3-414 Section D).

The conclusion that impacts related to the relocation or construction of new wastewater conveyance facilities would be less than significant therefore does not appear to be supported by substantial evidence. The potential for impacts remains.

wastewater conveyance associated with build-out of future housing development projects associated with the Housing Element would be potentially significant.

UTIL-1 As written, UTIL-1 constitutes both improper deferral of analysis and improper deferral of mitigation. Furthermore, the mitigation measure uses words such as “may” that do not mandate performance. Given potential timing issues and the ability of the City to require by-right housing projects to construct infrastructure improvements, the potential for significant unmitigated impacts remains.

Sewage Treatment Capacity

significant unmitigated impact on sewage treatment capacity, stating: “Although significant treatment capacity is currently available at the BWRP to treat wastewater generated because of the Project, the BWRP’s capacity is 4 mgd, which would not be sufficient to accommodate a conservative estimate of 6.3 mgd of wastewater generated by a full buildout of the Housing Element Update.” This level of impact does not have a 5 https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Burbank/html/Burbank09/Burbank0903.html#9-3-413 3-102
ATTACHMENT 12-387
clear and easy remedy. The RDEIR needs to provide more detail on what this impact would mean for residents in the City, how it would manifest, how long an exceedance of treatment capacity would exist before system up-grades could be brought on-line and thus the short-term of long-term nature of the impact.

UTIL-3a The RDEIR needs to address the feasibility of this mitigation measure given recent changes in State housing law which creates a larger class of by-right residential developments.

UTIL-3b The RDEIR needs to address the feasibility of this mitigation measure given the large- scale up-zoning of the region mandated by recent Housing Element legislation. It cannot be assumed, without supporting analysis, that other facilities will have capacity to address Burbank’s overage, given cumulative development. What mechanism would be put in place to ensure that developers rather than existing residents pay the cost of any diversion to the City of Los Angeles?
UTIL-3d The RDEIR needs to address the potential impacts of this mitigation measure as part of the RDEIR. The City’s decision-makers and the public need to be provided with information on the likely indirect impacts of the Project.

Stormwater

periods. What is the remaining capacity during dry and wet seasons and during average and more intense storm events?
Solid Waste

landfills which may serve the City? To what degree will the Project in combination with cumulative development impact the lifespan of the various landfills? Electricity

maximum number of GWhs that can be supplied by BWP and if so, what is it?

sources. Please provide a source breakdown.

transmission capabilities, quantify the projected increase in electrical demand resulting from the Project, and identify any system deficiencies. 3-103
ATTACHMENT 12-388
Why h asn’t BWP been consulted on this analysis? BWP needs to be consulted and the analysis revised.

Although all parcels in Burbank have access to public utility infrastructure, in some cases the infrastructure is older and in need of replacement or insufficient to meet the needs of a particular project. Pursuant to General Plan Land Use Policy 2.3, new development is required to pay for their share of upgrading the utility infrastructure as needed to serve their project. This may include new electrical transformers, new transmission lines and/or new substations.

Developers are responsible for funding any infrastructure improvements that are required to mitigate project impacts and have not been previously identified as part of a capital improvement program covered by the development impact fees. Consistent with applicable State law, the City’s development fees will ensure that the developers pay the cost attributable to the increased demand for the affected public facilities reasonably related to the development project in order to refurbish the existing facilities to maintain the existing level of service and achieve an adopted level of service that is consistent with the City’s General Plan (California Government Code Section 66001(g)).

Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.

Again, the RDEIR fails to address whether the existing fee structure anticipated the level of development that would result for the Housing Element, whether an assessment has been done to determine the nature and location of upgrades needed, how long it will take to do this assessment and to update the fee structure. The potential for impacts clearly remains. Furthermore, testimony by BWP staff at the April 5, 2022 City Council Meeting (see link and information in the introduction to these Infrastructure comments re this meeting) documents the potential for significant electrical transmission system impacts. The RDEIR needs to be revised and recirculated to identify and address these potential impacts.

Natural Gas

2019. Is there a maximum number of therms that can be supplied by SCG and if so, what is it? What is the demand generated by the Project.

Deficient Cumulative Impact Analysis
As noted in CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1),
3-104
ATTACHMENT 12-389
The following elements are necessary to an adequate discussion of significant cumulative impacts:
(1) Either:
(A) A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency, or
(B) A summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional or statewide plan, or related planning document, that describes or evaluates conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. Such plans may include: a general plan, regional transportation plan, or plans for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. A summary of projections may also be contained in an adopted or certified prior environmental document for such a plan. Such projections may be supplemented with additional information such as a regional modeling program. Any such document shall be referenced and made available to the public at a location specified by the lead agency.

The RDEIR fails to include a list of cumulative projects list or a summary of projections. The cumulative impact analysis contained in the RDEIR is thus too general and lacks the specificity required by CEQA. Given that neighboring jurisdictions are also engaged in reasonably foreseeable up-zoning to meet RHNA targets, it is vitally important that any analysis of the cumulative infrastructure and public service impacts of the project (as well as the other CEQA issue areas) take account of anticipated up- zoning by nearby cities, in the region, and throughout the State. Without such analysis, the true impact of the Project on infrastructure capacity and service availability cannot be assessed. The cumulative impact analysis included in the RDEIR is very general, is narrative rather than quantitative, and constitutes general arguments unsupported by substantial evidence.

CONCLUSION
Thank you for your consideration of my concerns. I thank you in advance for correcting these fatal EIR flaws and more accurately disclosing to Burbank residents the impacts of the project and cumulative housing law changes. Given the defects in the document, and the failure to identify all of the Project and cumulative impacts, the document must be corrected and recirculated.

Sincerely,
Susan O’Carroll
Burbank Resident
cc: Burbank City Council
3-105
ATTACHMENT 12-390
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR Final Environmental Impact Report
Letter I-2
COMMENTER: Susan O’Carroll
DATE: September 6, 2022
Response I-2.1
The commenter states the EIR fails to completely analyze the impacts of up-zoning and construction of 10,456 housing units in the City of Burbank, which would represent a 23 percent increase in housing units. The commentor indicates that the EIR found only two significant VMT and wastewater impacts and states the City Council should not allow the up-zoning.

This is an introductory statement and the commentor provides detailed reasons to support her position. Individual responses to each comment are provided below.

Response I-2.2
The commentor states that expanding sewer treatment capacity by 57 percent would represent a substantial impact pending development of the additional capacity.

As discussed under Impact UTIL-3 in Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, of the Recirculated Draft EIR, implementation of the Project would generate wastewater that exceeds BWRP’s wastewater treatment capacity of 4 million gallons per day (mgd). Based on the PWD’s calculations, the Project would be anticipated to generate an estimated 6.3 mgd. Burbank’s PWD is currently working on both a Cost of Service/Rate Study and Needs Assessment for the BWRP. PWD will also be initiating a new Sewer Master Plan in fiscal year 2023/24 to evaluate the City’s sewer conveyance and treatment system over the next 20 years. The analysis acknowledges that these studies would take approximately one to two years to be completed, and final recommendations would not be available at the time the Housing Element is scheduled to be approved. Therefore, no feasible mitigation measures were identified at the plan level to reduce impacts to wastewater treatment capacity associated with the Project, resulting in significant and unavoidable impacts. However, it is anticipated that the short- and long-term wastewater mitigation measures will address the impacts over the course of the eight-year period under the proposed Housing Element. In addition, each individual housing development project will be required to undertake its own environmental impact analysis, which requires subsequent analyses to prove that there will be adequate capacity to serve the needs of the project. If adequate systems are not in place, the project would be required to take the necessary actions to ensure that the wastewater needs are met prior to approval of the project.

Response I-2.3
The commentor states the Recirculated Draft EIR’s analysis of impacts to public services and utilities needed quantification. The commentor also states that the Recirculated Draft EIR needs to include quantification of the increase in demand of water, other utilities, and public services and to compare those numbers to existing and planned capacity.

The Recirculated Draft EIR included quantified analysis at a programmatic level for impacts associated with air quality, GHG emissions, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, and utilities and service systems. The Recirculated Draft EIR evaluates the potential impacts associated with the implementation of the Housing Element Update at a programmatic level. Individual development projects accommodated under the Project would 3-106
ATTACHMENT 12-391
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
require project-level CEQA review, which will identify and require mitigation for any potential site- specific projects associated with water supply, utilities, and public services.

Response I-2.4
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR failed to comply with CEQA’s requirement to address impacts of the Project including construction and operation of additional sewage facilities.

As discussed under Impact UTIL-1 in Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, of the Recirculated Draft EIR, implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-1 would require a sewer service constraints analysis by PWD to identify a wastewater connection fee for the recovery of the City’s costs of future upgrades that are proportional to the individual project’s impact to the City’s wastewater system. The potential indirect impacts associated with sewage facilities are unknown at this time because the sewer service constraints analysis has not been completed. Therefore, the direct and indirect Project impacts associated with new or expanded wastewater conveyance are significant and unavoidable.

Response I-2.5
The commentor states that any cumulative impact analysis needs to address the impact of the City’s housing element targets in combination with project housing increases in neighboring jurisdictions, such as the City of Los Angeles. The commentor questions how the cumulative development in combination with the proposed Project would impact public services and utilities in the Burbank area. In addition, the commentor questions how assumptions about water availability be justified given the massive up-zoning of California and states that water and other service availability was not adequately addressed in the Recirculated Draft EIR.

The cumulative impacts section included for each environmental issue area in the Recirculated Draft EIR takes into consideration future housing development accommodated under the Housing Element Update, as well as cumulative development at the regional level. The Draft EIR analysis was conducted at the program level which used a conservative approach by evaluating impacts of the development of housing required under the City’s regional housing need as well as from housing developed on sites identified in the Housing Element site inventory; however, the Housing Element Update does not directly result in development of housing on the identified sites. Individual development projects accommodated under the Housing Element Update would require project- level CEQA review, which would identify and require mitigation for any potential site-specific and cumulative impacts associated with water supply, utilities and service systems, and public services.

Also, refer to Response I-1.2 regarding water supply.

Response I-2.6
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR must address as part of the cumulative impact analysis, the impact of the proposed Project in combination with not only RHNA targets for the greater Los Angeles region, but also impacts of SB 9, SB 10, and SB 35 and similar legislation not accounted for in the housing element update.

Refer to Response I-1.8 in Section 2, Responses to Comments on Draft EIR, or Response I-1.9 above, as this comment was previously submitted and responded to therein. 3-107
ATTACHMENT 12-392
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.7
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR fails to support its conclusion with substantial evidence and supporting data by not including footnote sources or providing links to key documents.

The Recirculated Draft EIR did not include new information that revised Section 7, References, of the Draft EIR. The references for the Recirculated Draft EIR are available online using this link:
https://www.burbankhousingelement.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Burbank-Housing-and- Safety-Element-Update-DEIR.pdf
Response I-2.8
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR fails to provide adequate cumulative impact analysis which fails to inform City Leaders about unfunded state mandates.

Refer to Response I-2.5.

Response I-2.9
The commenter states that it is important for the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR to accurately disclose the impacts of mandates imposed on the City through recent State legislation and the projected harmful effect of those mandates on the quality of life in Burbank and the City’s ability to provide basic public services and functioning infrastructure. The commenter also states that one of the key purposes of CEQA is to disclose the environmental values of elected officials to the public and that it is important for the Draft EIR to disclose the impacts which the State legislature has chosen to impose on the City via legislative mandates to the public. Lastly, the commenter states that the Recirculated Draft EIR must be rewritten to acknowledge additional significant project and cumulative impacts, and recirculated for additional public review and comment before any action can be taken to certify the Recirculated Draft EIR or approve the Project.

The scope of the EIR is to analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with the development of reasonably foreseeable development accommodated under the Housing Element Update.

As described in Section 15002 of the CEQA Guidelines, the basic purposes of CEQA are to inform governmental decision makers and the public about potential, significant environmental effects of the Project; identify the ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced; prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the governmental agency finds the changes to be feasible; and disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the Project in the manner the agency chose if significant environmental effects are involved. Significant impacts at a programmatic level have been disclosed which will be assessed by the decisionmakers. Any potential impacts at a project level will require further CEQA analysis.

Response I-2.10
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR needs to include a revised impact summary table which incorporates the findings of the supplemental analysis.

A summary of the changes to the EIR is provided in Section 1.3, Introduction, of the Recirculated Draft EIR.
3-108
ATTACHMENT 12-393
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.11
The commentor asks for annotated copies of the pages of these elements showing the intended updates, additions, and deletions of the Safety, Land Use, Open Space, Conservation, Air Quality and Climate Change, Noise, Mobility Elements, and Environmental Justice. In addition, the commentor states that the project description is inadequate because it fails to provide a description of these changes or to provide annotated copies of the updated Elements as linked documents or attachments.

The City of Burbank includes annotated copies of these elements showing the intended updates on the City of Burbank Housing Element Update website. See the links to the annotated copies below.

The Revised Draft Housing Element is available online using this link:
https://www.burbankhousingelement.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Draft-Housing- Element_redlined-2022.pdf
The Revised Draft Safety Element is available online using this link:
https://www.burbankhousingelement.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Safety-Element_August- 2022.pdf
Section 2, Project Description, of the Recirculated Draft EIR included minor edits from the original Draft EIR that did not result in the need to edit any additional Draft EIR sections.

Response I-2.12
The commentor questions why the Specific Plan development was not addressed as part of the cumulative impact analysis and was instead included as part of the analysis of the proposed Project.

The commentor asks why the anticipated residential development associated with the two Specific Plan was not counted towards achievement of the RHNA allocation, rather than added to the RHNA allocation. In addition, the commentor asks if the impacts of the two Specific Plans previously received environmental review, and if so when, what are their associated State Clearinghouse (SCH) numbers, what are the hyperlinks to those documents, and when were those Specific Plans approved.

As stated in Section 2, Project Description, the
estimated number and affordability level of housing
units to accommodate the City’s RHNA under the existing General Plan and zoning results in a shortfall of 1,203 units below the RHNA allocation. As such, the Housing Element Update includes a housing program to rezone additional opportunity sites through adoption of two specific plan projects: the Downtown Transit-Oriented-Development Specific Plan (Downtown TOD) and the Golden State Specific Plan (GSSP). Adoption of these Specific Plans will provide the necessary zoning, objective development standards, and processing procedures to facilitate the production of the shortfall of housing units required to accommodate the City’s RHNA during the Housing Element planning period. The zone changes required by these Specific Plans will be adopted in 2022-2023, or within three years of the start of the planning period as required by State law. EIRs are currently being prepared for the Specific Plans. A NOP was circulated for the Burbank Downtown Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Specific Plan. Due to revisions to this this Specific Plan, a revised NOP will be circulated in the near future. The SCH number is 2021050436; here is the link to documents on CEQAnet: https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2021050436/2
The NOP for the Golden State Specific Plan is available using this link:
https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020089016/2. The SCH number is 2020089016. 3-109
ATTACHMENT 12-394
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Preparation of the EIR for the Media Center Specific Plan is at the beginning stages, so no SCH number is available yet.

Response I-2.13
The commentor states that a project description is fundamental and due to changes in the project and recirculation of the EIR, the project description should include more than just the changes in the Recirculated Draft EIR.

The Recirculated Draft EIR project description identifies the location, summarizes the proposed project (including a change since the Original EIR was published), identifies Project characteristics and associated anticipated development, and outlines the Project objectives.

According to CEQA Guidelines 15124 (Project Description), the description of the project shall not supply extensive detail beyond that needed for evaluation and review of the environmental impact.

The Project Description summarizes the intent and scope of the proposed updates to the General Plan elements, and also includes details regarding the anticipated development potential under the proposed Housing Element, which provides the basis for the quantitative analysis throughout the EIR. As a programmatic analysis, no additional detail for the project description is required.

Response I-2.14
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR must include an analysis and the cumulative impact of the Project in combination with the up-zoning occurring throughout the region.

Refer to Response I-2.5.

Response I-2.15
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR should include a table like Table 2-1 which provides the RHNA allocation of the region and for adjoining cities.

The SCAG RHNA allocation for adjoining cities can be found on the SCAG website using the following link: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/6th_cycle_final_rhna_allocation_plan_070121.pdf?1646938785.

The following are SCAG’s RHNA numbers for the cities of Los Angeles and Glendale:

City of Los Angeles
Total
Very-Low
Income Low-Income
Moderate
Income
Above Moderate
Income
456,643 115,978 68,743 75,091 196,831

City of Glendale
Total Very-low Income Low Income
Moderate
Income
Above Moderate
Income
13,425 3,439 2,163 2,249 5,574

3-110
ATTACHMENT 12-395
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.16
The commentor states that there will be two specific plan projects: The Downtown TOD and GSSP which will provide necessary zoning, objective development standards, and processing procedures to facilitate the production of the shortfall of housing units required to accommodate the City’s RHNA during the Housing Element planning period. The commentor questions if these Specific Plans will have separate EIRs or if the Recirculated Draft EIR is the EIR for the Specific Plans.

Refer to Response I-2.12. The Recirculated Draft EIR is a programmatic EIR which evaluates impacts on the development of housing required under the City’s regional housing needs. Individual development projects accommodated under the Housing Element update would require project- level CEQA review, which will identify and require mitigation for any potential site-specific projects associated with water supply, utilities, and public services.

Response I-2.17
The commentor states that more site-specific impact analysis should be included for Project sites identified for rezoning and states that no zone changes should be approved without site-specific level environmental analysis.

The Recirculated Draft EIR is a programmatic EIR which evaluates impacts on the development of housing required under the City’s regional housing needs. Individual development projects accommodated under the Housing Element update would require project-level CEQA review, which will identify and require mitigation for any potential site-specific projects associated with water supply, utilities, and public services. A site-specific level of analysis will be conducted during individual development projects. In addition, the proposed Specific Plans have commenced separate EIR analysis.

Response I-2.18
The commentor states to provide links to annotated versions of the Proposed Safety Element Update and Environmental Justice Update.

Refer to Response I-2.11 for the link to the annotated Revised Safety Element Update. The environmental justice element can be achieved by incorporating goals, policies and objectives into existing elements. In order to address a number of State regulations, environmental justice was addressed in the existing General Plan elements such as the Housing Element Update. The City of Burbank does not have a separate Environmental Justice Element.

Response I-2.19
The commentor states that it would be helpful if the Recirculated Draft EIR included copy of the comments by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) that state that the proposed Project may have adverse impacts to the least Bell’s vireo, bat species, and monarch butterflies through vegetation and tree removal.

Comments by the CDFW can be found in Section 2, Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR, and in Appendix A, Notice of Preparation – Scoping Comments, of the Draft EIR, which is available using this link: https://www.burbankhousingelement.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Appendix- A_NOP-Scoping-Comments.pdf
3-111
ATTACHMENT 12-396
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.20
The commentor states that the biological resources section of the Recirculated Draft EIR is not responsive to CDFW comments, including comments regarding the monarch butterflies.

Refer to Letter A-3, Responses A-3.1 through A-3.10 in Section 2, Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR, for full responses to the letter received from the CDFW on March 18, 2022. In the CDFW comment letter, the commenter suggested that there may be adverse impacts to least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), various bat species, and the monarch butterfly. The commenter also suggested changes to the mitigation presented in Section 4.2, Biological Resources, and summarized CDFWs filing fee policy.

In response to these concerns, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 was revised to address these potential impacts, which acknowledges CDFW’s comments and states that a qualified biologist shall be retained by the applicant to conduct an initial site assessment that will include review of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and iNaturalist maps to determine where sightings have occurred or habitats for the least Bell’s vireo, bat species, or monarch butterflies have previously been identified. Surveys may be required for sites that are in proximity to previously identified areas where habitats for the least Bell’s vireo, bat species, or monarch butterflies have previously been identified, and for development activities that would occur during the nesting season. In addition, on April 20, 2022, prior to release of the Recirculated Draft EIR, City staff had a call with CDFW staff to ensure that CDFW staff is satisfied with the revisions to Mitigation Measure BIO-1. No additional revisions are necessary.

Response I-2.21
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR fails to describe the share of land zoned for residential development at the base of the Verdugo Mountains. In addition, the commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR fails to address the potential biological resource impacts of development on vacant residential parcels, which may impact habitat connectivity and wildlife corridors. The commentor states that the city fails to adequately address the impacts associated with increasing urbanization.

Refer to Figure 2-3, Specific Plan and Housing Opportunity Locations, in Section 2, Project Description. Also, refer to Response I-1.4 for a full description of the land use types where housing under the Housing Element Update may be developed. The Verdugo Mountains are located to the east of the city. As shown in Figure 2-3, neither the Downtown District nor the Golden State Specific Plan District infringe on parts of the Verdugo Mountains zoned as OS – Open Space. Reasonably foreseeable development under proposed Project would primarily occur within these districts.

Development outside of these districts may occur but not at the level of development that is anticipated to occur in the transit-orientated areas of the city. Therefore, it is not anticipated that development facilitated by the Housing Element Update would result in significant impacts to areas in proximity to the Verdugo Mountains. No revisions to the EIR are required to address this comment. Further, Land Use Element Policy 14.5 of Burbank2035 prohibits further subdivision of land in open space areas in the hillside areas of the Verdugo Mountains and limits future development in the hillside areas to infill development on existing lots in established neighborhoods.
3-112
ATTACHMENT 12-397
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.22
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR must provide a map showing the location of sensitive species identified in the California Natural Diversity Database and the location where additional urbanization may result in impacts and compare these locations to the location of residential zoning in the city. In addition, the commentor states to provide a map showing the location of blue-line streams and other wetlands as compared to the location of residential zoning in the city.

Public documents cannot use CNDDB data at certain scales due to the possibility of people harming a species or its habitat. As such, the figure provided below shows the city’s sphere of influence and the location of streams and wetlands near critical habitat. Refer to Figure 2-3, Specific Plan and Housing Opportunity Locations, in Section 2, Project Description, to view where the housing opportunity sites are located. When comparing Figure 2-3 to the figure on the following page, it can be seen that no streams or riparian habitat occur within the housing opportunity site districts.

Figure 2-3 and the figure below may also be compared to the National Wetlands Inventory Mapper located here:
https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/ As demonstrated through the figures, reasonably foreseeable development under the proposed Project would occur in urbanized areas of the city, and therefore, would not directly or indirectly impact sensitive natural communities or riparian habitat. 3-113
ATTACHMENT 12-398
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report

3-114
ATTACHMENT 12-399
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.23
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR must define the term, “reasonably foreseeable development under the Housing Element.” The commentor states if this term is not the same as buildout under the Housing Element, the analysis must fully address Project Impacts.

Refer to Response I-1.2 above for a detail on the meaning of “reasonably foreseeable” and its application according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064. Direct impacts of the adoption of the Housing Element Update are evaluated in the Initial Study and Recirculated Draft EIR. Reasonably foreseeable indirect impacts have also been evaluated. An impact is not considered reasonably foreseeable if the impact is speculative or unlikely to occur. Thus, buildout under the Housing Element Update is not speculative or unlikely to occur, and would be considered reasonably foreseeable.

Response I-2.24
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR fails to address impacts associated with the long-term loss of habitat resulting from increased urbanization. The commentor states that the biological resources analysis is very general and fails to provide any real analysis of long-term impacts to species of concern.

Please refer to Responses I-1.4, I-2.20 through I-2.22, and Letter 3 and the following responses in Section 2, Response to Comments for the Draft EIR. As described therein, development facilitated by the Housing Element Update will occur in places that are currently urbanized or built-up. However, some sensitive species may still occur in these areas. For that reason, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 will be implemented to ensure that the project would not have significant impacts to the species listed in Section 4.2, Biological Resources. Additionally, pages 4.2-7 and 4.2-8 discuss the cumulative impacts that the project may have on sensitive species. It was determined that implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would be adequate in ensuring no cumulative impacts would occur.

Response I-2.25
The commentor states that the mitigation measures may not be practical if the City does not have the necessary database to implement the mitigation measure with the observations to CNDDB or iNaturalist. The commentor questions how frequent will the database be updated and how will the findings of biological assessment be entered into the database. The commentor states if this mitigation measure will apply to any residential developments that will require a grading permit and if by-right developments will escape the requirements of this mitigation.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1 requires that a qualified biologist is retained by the applicant to conduct an initial site assessment that will include review of the most current California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and iNaturalist maps to determine where sightings have occurred or habitats for the least Bell’s vireo, bat species, or monarch butterflies have previously been identified. As a part of implementing the aforementioned mitigation measure the City will modify its grading permit process. Prior to issuing a grading permit that would remove or disrupt habitats for the least Bell’s vireo, bat species, or monarch butterflies (identified based on the most current California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and iNaturalist maps or other relevant database), a qualified biologist shall be retained by the project applicant to conduct a biological resources reconnaissance of the site. This mitigation measure will apply to all projects requiring a grading permit. 3-115
ATTACHMENT 12-400
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.26
The commentor states that it is inappropriate to limit the cumulative impact analysis to the city limits because Housing Element Updates and associated up-zoning is being required throughout the region. In addition, the commentor states that the analysis fails to indicate whether the cumulative impact analysis is based on a list or on forecasts. The commentor states that the analysis fails to address habitat loss and long-term cumulative impacts of increasing urbanization on sensitive species, habitat, and wildlife corridors.

Refer to Responses I-2.5 and I-2.22. Moreover, the majority of development projected under the Project would occur within the City in urbanized sites that have been previously disturbed. In addition, Land Use Element Policy 14.4 of the Burbank2035 General Plan states that the City will “preserve the natural amenities of the Verdugo Mountains and use these amenities to provide outdoor recreation opportunities when appropriate.” Further, other jurisdictions undertaking similar Projects with similar potential impacts would be tasked with addressing these types of concerns from the state agencies with regulatory oversight and compliance and the applicable provision of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Response I-2.27
The commentor states that the video, linked in the comment letter, provides support for the need for detailed analysis of potential impacts of the Housing Element with cumulative development within and outside the city on utilities and service system. In addition, the commentor states that it provides evidence that the Recirculated Draft EIR fails to identify likely impacts such as impacts to the electric system.

Refer to Response I-1.4 in Section 2, Responses to Comments on Draft EIR, and I-1.7, above, as this comment is similar and responded to therein. The citywide analysis of the Housing Element Update was analyzed under a Program EIR, which does not require analysis of each individual project. As such, it is not possible with the current level of information provided to reduce all variables related to sewage capacity. Please note that for proposed developments with a significant increase in housing units that trigger a sewer capacity analysis, which is any project with a net increase of five or more additional multi-family housing units, developers will be required to upgrade City sewer infrastructure that is directly impacted by the proposed project, and/or contribute their fair share cost of the sewer improvements as determined by the Public Works Director or their designee.

Similarly, individual housing developments would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis to determine their energy demand, if adequate supply exists, and other associated energy impacts. As part of that review, specific energy data from BWP will be utilized to measure a project’s direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts. As stated on page 4.12-27 of Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, BWP will procure resources that meet or exceed state clean energy standards, while maintaining reliability of the grid in a cost-effective manner.

At the project level, future individual projects accommodated under the Housing Element Update would require project-level CEQA review, which would identify and require mitigation for any potential site-specific impacts associated with the construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities, and electrical systems. No additional analysis is required in the Recirculated Draft EIR.
3-116
ATTACHMENT 12-401
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.28
The commentor states if there were any interviews conducted with experts from the City of Burbank Water and Power (BWP) to inform the Utilities and Service Systems section for the Recirculated Draft EIR.

All applicable City departments routinely review environmental documents. As such, BWP and Public Works reviewed and assisted in writing analyses for the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR.

Therefore, the document used the most recently available data from the City staff and other publicly available sources of information. As new information becomes available, it will be incorporated into the individual project analysis for developments facilitated by the Housing Element Update.

Response I-2.29
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR needs to specific what percent of Burbank’s water comes from MWD and what percent comes from groundwater as seen on Table 4.12-1. In addition, the commentor states the Recirculated Draft EIR must disclose how much recycled water is being used in the city.

The Recirculated Draft EIR states that potable water comes from two sources: water purchased from MWD and from local groundwater from the San Fernando Valley Groundwater Basin (San Fernando Basin). BWP also utilizes recycled water to meet some of its demands of its water needs such as outdoor irrigation and power plant cooling.

There is no percentage breakdown for water sources provided in the UWMP prepared by BWP.

However, based on the 2020 baseline provided in the UWMP, it can be determined that approximately 32 percent (6,165 AF) was MWD treated potable water, 51 percent (9,997 AF) was from groundwater sources blended with MWD treated potable water, 16 percent (3,149 AF) was recycled non-potable water, and 0.8 percent (152 AF) was MWD untreated non-potable water that all contribute to the total 2020 supply of 19,463 AF. According to the UWMP, the projected water supply will increase, and the distribution of these sources will change. For additional information on water supply, refer to the UWMP prepared by BWP at the following link:
https://www.burbankwaterandpower.com/images/administrative/downloads/BWP_2020UWMP_Fi nal.pdf
Response I-2.30
The commentor states if Burbank has complied with the California Water Conservation Bill and to what degree the city met its targets. In addition, the commentor asks if the targets have not been met, what are the factors that have impacted the ability to meet conservation targets.

The Recirculated Draft EIR addresses the State regulations including California Water Conservation Bill, Senate Bill X7-7, which required urban water suppliers, such as the City of Burbank, to reduce per capita water use 20 percent by 2020, establish water conservation targets for the years 2015 and 2020. Growth under the proposed project is accounted for in the City of Burbank Urban Water Management Plan as informed by the General Plan. According to the UWMP prepared by BWP, the City met it’s 20 percent reduction in 2010. Refer to the link in Response I-2.29 for the link to the UWMP.
3-117
ATTACHMENT 12-402
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.31
The commentor states if the Water Supply Assessment (WSA) is an appendix to the Draft EIR or the Recirculated Draft EIR. If the WSA is not in the appendix, the commentor states to please provide and link to the WSA prepared for the Project.

Refer to Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, for additional information on WSAs and when they are required. Per SB 610, a WSA must be completed for any project that would demand 75 AFY of water, or the amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required for a 500-dwelling-unit project. As stated therein, the Housing Element Update is a planning document, not a development project, and therefore does not directly trigger the need for a WSA as defined by the California Water Code. Thus, a WSA was not prepared for the Housing Element Update.

However, individual housing projects facilitated by the Housing Element Update may be subject to SB 610 and will be evaluated on a project-by-project basis.

Due to the comment received, a change to Section 4.12 has been made. Mention of a WSA prepared for the Housing Element Update was removed from the section, as this information was not accurate. Please see that change reflected in Section 4, Errata for the Draft EIR.

Response I-2.32
The commentor states if there is an existing mechanism like SB 221 for constricting development if existing demand meets or exceeds supply given the proposed Project. In addition, the commentor states that a mitigation measure needs to be included for a public service/ infrastructure impact whereby a development moratorium is triggered when impact thresholds are approached.

The City of Burbank’s Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) prepared by BWP includes an assessment of past and future water supplies and demands, evaluation of the future reliability of Burbank’s water supplies over a 20-year planning horizon (2040), discussion of demand management measures and Burbank’s water shortage contingency plan, discussion of the use and planned use of recycled water, and an evaluation of distribution system water losses. As noted, the UWMP includes a water shortage contingency plan including a shortage response actions that includes water demand reduction measures in the form of 6 stages that can be implemented in times of water shortage. Stage V, which includes amongst other things “No new or upgraded potable water services permitted, except R-1 and R-2, unless building permit already issued.” Stage VI prohibits all outdoor watering.

Furthermore, Mitigation Measures UTIL-1 Sewer Service Constraints Analysis, UTIL-3a Sewer System Upgrades by Developers, UTIL-3b Sewage Diversion, UTIL-3c Sewer Master Plan and UTIL-3d Expansion and Upgrades to BWRP Treatment Facilities provide for short term and long term mitigation measures that evaluate impacts to the City’s sewer system infrastructure on a project-by- project basis as well as provide for the long term master planning to account for the City’s sewer system conveyance and capacity needs to facilitate new development under the Project through throughout the 8-year planning period. Included as part of these mitigation measures is preparation of a Sewer System Master Plan (SSMP) that will include amongst other things: a sewer system evaluation with flow modeling, a recommended Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) that identifies specific CIP projects to proactively address upgrades to the gravity system and pump stations; CIP costs estimates; a Long Term Rehabilitation/Replacement Strategy with recommendations on CIP phasing/implementation; and general recommendations on approaches to finance all the required upgrades and improvements to the City’s sewer infrastructure over the next twenty years. 3-118
ATTACHMENT 12-403
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.33
The commentor questions how the UWMP process addresses a situation like recent changes in housing law in the State, which have resulted in massive Statewide up-zoning. In addition, the commentor states how the plan development addresses the increase demand by other users of the same water source. The commentor states of the Statewide reduction target of 20 percent in urban water use by the year 2020 was met, and if not why.

Refer to Response I-2.30, above, for information regarding meeting the 20 percent urban water use reduction goal set by SB X7-7. As the UWMP is updated by BWP, it will continue to incorporate relevant and applicable policy changes into its analysis of available water supply and water demands, as necessary. As the UWMP is Burbank specific, it does include a discussion on the impacts of city zoning, and development trends within the city and surrounding areas to evaluate the potential water use and impacts of such zoning. The UWMP also makes reference to the City’s Housing Element, which is more directly influenced by changes in State housing policy.

Response I-2.34
The commentor states that the discussion of drought-related orders and declarations must be updated to discuss if reduction targets were met. In addition, the commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR must include any research regarding factors influencing the achievement of water reduction targets.

The Recirculated Draft EIR includes a description of each federal, State, and local policy applicable to water use reduction and drought. As the Recirculated Draft EIR is specific to the Housing Element Update, it is not required that it include a general discussion on whether the City has met the goals set by these policies. Such a discussion is better found in the UWMP, linked under Response I-2.29.

The Recirculated Draft EIR evaluates how such policies effect the adoption of the Housing Element Update and development facilitated by the Housing Element Update. The analysis also reviews for project compliance with these policies, and how it may impact policy goals. Individual housing projects facilitated by the Housing Element Update will be reviewed for compliance on a project-by- project basis to analyze if and/or how the projects will impact water use reduction and drought- related goals.

Response I-2.35
The commentor states that water supplies are predicted to decrease by 10 percent due to climate change as population and residential development continues to increase and questions how this has been addressed in the analysis of Project water impacts.

The Recirculated Draft EIR addresses climate change and water supply. Impact UTIL-1 in Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, states that the increased housing that would occur under the proposed Project would increase citywide water demand by up to 4,878 AFY, or approximately 22 percent of the City’s available water supply in 2045. In addition, although population growth has continued to increase, citywide water demand throughout Burbank has declined compared to the early 1970s due to efficient water use after major droughts in the 1970s, 1990s, and especially in response to the previous significant water shortage and closure of major industries. The Burbank2035 General Plan includes policies and programs in the Land Use Element as well as the Open Space and Conservation Element to address water resources and prepare Burbank for the possible consequences of climate change on water supply availability. Such policies include using native or drought-tolerant plants in landscaping, using recycled water in irrigation, and promoting 3-119
ATTACHMENT 12-404
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
all possible water conservation efforts. Conservation efforts would continue to be implemented and expanded as development associated with the proposed Project is constructed, and it is reasonably anticipated that conservation efforts will continue to be effective at reducing water demands.

Further, the City of Burbank’s Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) prepared by BWP includes an assessment of past and future water supplies and demands, evaluation of the future reliability of Burbank’s water supplies over a 20-year planning horizon (2040), discussion of demand management measures and Burbank’s water shortage contingency plan, discussion of the use and planned use of recycled water, and an evaluation of distribution system water losses. Based on the UWMP, BWP and Metropolitan determined that there is sufficient water capacity to serve the City’s water demand including those resulting from Project implementation.

Response I-2.36
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR failed to reference the 2015 Water Tomorrow Update. The commentor states to provide a link to the document and a summary of its contents.

The 2015 Water Tomorrow Update is referenced in Section 4.12, Utilities/Service System, as part of the Regulatory Setting since this is a plan to provide water supplies under a wide range of potential future conditions and risks. However, the analysis relied on the City’s UWMP to address the CEQA thresholds the EIR, as it provides the most up to date information on the City’s anticipated supply and demand for water.

The 2015 Water Tomorrow Update may be accessed by the following link:
https://www.mwdh2o.com/media/15970/integrated-water-resources-plan-update- 2015.pdf?keywords=2015%20IRP
Refer to Response I-2.29 for the link to the 2020 UWMP.

Response I-2.37
The commentor states that recent State law have made a number of housing projects by-right developments and states if this will affect the City’s ability to get developers to fund infrastructure improvements. The commentor asks to what degree will the development be covered by existing fee structures and to cite the links to these documents. In addition, the commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR includes UTIL-1 to address wastewater conveyance; however, there is no similar mitigation required for the water transmission system.

As stated in Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, developers are responsible for funding any infrastructure improvements that are required to mitigate project impacts and have not been covered by the development impact fees. Development facilitated by the Housing Element Update will be subject to all existing development fees discussed in the Burbank Municipal Code (BMC), such as Sewer Facility Charges (SFCs). A Sewer Rate Study is currently being prepared and it is anticipated that an item will be brought to City Council in FY 2022-23. Additionally, consistent with applicable State law, the City’s development fees will ensure that the developers pay the cost attributable to the increased demand for the affected public facilities reasonably related to the development project to refurbish the existing facilities to maintain the existing level of service and achieve an adopted level of service that is consistent with the City’s General Plan (California Government Code Section 66001(g)). Title 8 of the BMC discusses sewers and other utilities. Title 8 is linked below:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Burbank/#!/Burbank08/Burbank08.html 3-120
ATTACHMENT 12-405
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
As discussed under Impact UTIL-1, as individual housing projects are proposed and considered for approval by the City, project proponents would be required to demonstrate that any identified system deficiencies reasonably related to the development project are adequately addressed by the responsible project proponent and future upgrades are designed in accordance with the BMC and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

New service connections that may be required for development associated with the proposed Project would be conducted within previously disturbed areas and existing rights-of-way, and would be consistent with utility expansion in urbanized areas, such that minimal areas of new disturbance would occur. Although all parcels in Burbank have access to public utility infrastructure, in some cases the infrastructure is older and in need of replacement or insufficient to meet the needs of a particular project. Pursuant to General Plan Land Use Policy 2.3, new development is required to pay for their share of upgrading the utility infrastructure as needed to serve their project. This may include installing larger water mains, new water meters, and/or upgrades to existing facilities.

However, mitigation is not required.

Please note that water supply facilities would not have to be relocated to support the housing element.
 The five potable water connections with MWD would remain where they are as they exist.  The Burbank Operable Unit (Burbank’s treatment plant) and related wells would not be relocated or resized.
 An on-going pipeline replacement program, in part, guided by hydraulic analyses of water flows within our city’s pipe network, requires pipes to be replaced and relocated within the street.

This would remain the status quo with or without the housing element and is a minor impact.

Furthermore, water supply facilities may have to be constructed to support the housing element, which may include increasing reservoir storage. However, this will have negligible fiscal and environmental impact. Based on the latest and known information related to MWD’s ability to serve Burbank, no new facilities need to be constructed in order to deliver the additional water supply to support the housing element. Burbank’s pumps stations are adequately sized to convey the water needed by the housing element.

Response I-2.38
The commentor states that the contention that the “(p)otential impacts related to relocation or construction of water supply facilities would be less than significant” has not been supported by fact. The commentor states that the analysis of the impact of the Project wastewater conveyance is classified as significant. The commentor states that there should be a side-by-side comparison of the impacts of water conveyance and wastewater conveyance.

A side-by-side comparison would show that the impact of the Project on water and wastewater systems are not comparable because they are fundamentally different in their design and operation:
 Potable systems are closed conduits and the water in them is pumped. This removes the limitation on the system to accept higher flows and increased capacity. To increase capacity pumping is increased and the pipe size is evaluated to make sure the pressure required is not too high. Because the city’s pipes are networked together there is much flexibility in how we move water and our ability to increase the pipe sizes as needed. The Project will require some pipes to be bigger in localized areas and this would be determined through hydraulic modeling.

The impact to the distribution system from the project is not significant. 3-121
ATTACHMENT 12-406
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
 Except for certain pipes called force mains, sewer systems are predominantly open conduits that are not under pressure. Wastewater is moved through them based on the slope of the pipes. There is not much you can do to increase the capacity of an “open channel” system. You can’t pump the wastewater to increase the flow in such pipes because waste water would flow back into homes. There would only be two ways to increase capacity: (1) increase the pipe size; or, (2) change the slope of the pipe. The first would require digging up every pipe and replacing it. The second is not possible because the starting point and finishing point elevations are already fixed.
 Lastly, the wastewater that flows through the Burbank Water Reclamation Plant (BWRP) flows through it at a fixed rate because the flow relies on the difference in elevation between where the waste water goes in and where the treated waste water goes out. There is some variation in flow that can be “smoothed out” through the use of tanks to keep the rate constant. However, to increase the capacity of the BWRP, the plant would have to be significantly modified.

Impacts to the sewer system are significant. Impacts to the potable system are not.

Please refer to Response I-2.37, above, for information regarding why mitigation regarding water conveyance is not necessary.

Reasonably foreseeable development under the proposed Project would require new connections for wastewater conveyance. As described in Section 4.13.1(b) above, wastewater conveyance in Burbank is provided by approximately 230 miles of City-owned and operated underground pipelines and associated pump stations. The Burbank Public Works Department is responsible for the maintenance of the City’s sewer mainlines, while individual property owners are responsible for the maintenance of the sewer laterals that connect buildings to mainlines. All structures producing sewage or liquid waste in the city must be connected to the sewer system mainline by sewer lateral lines, which require issuance of an excavation permit and a sewer connection permit from the Public Works Permit Section. Based on the results of the sewer capacity analysis, these improvements may include, but not be limited to installing new or larger sewer lines and/or upgrading existing facilities. A new Sewer System Master Plan was part of the City’s approved budget for FY 2022-23, and the study will evaluate the aforementioned improvements.

Due to the built-up nature of this area, there are substantial existing utility rights-of-way previously established, largely within existing roadways, which are prevalent. New wastewater service connections that may be required as a direct result of new development associated with the proposed Project would be conducted within previously disturbed areas, existing rights-of-way, and, in some cases, a new easement would be created. Where sanitary sewer capital upgrades are needed it is possible that a new development may require new or expanded facilities to serve the project prior to the proposed project’s construction (at cost to the developer). Mitigation Measure UTIL-1 is required to evaluate whether there are any sewer constraints and to determine fees that are required to support sewer system upgrades. The City’s water system is prepared for current and future demands, and development facilitated by the Housing Element Update and needed water conveyance infrastructure is sufficient. However, the wastewater and sewer system will be necessary to expand, and therefore, impacts to the sewer system were found to be significant.

It should also be noted that the BWRP relies on gravity flow for the majority of its process/operations, and thus would require significant upgrades to accommodate the additional flows, which may include but are not limited to, acquisition of currently-developed land surrounding the BWRP.
3-122
ATTACHMENT 12-407
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.39
The commentor states that the City must consult with BWP regarding the potential for water system impacts associated with the level of new development over the next eight years and the agency’s ability to respond to increased demand.

Refer to Impact UTIL-2 in Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, for additional detail on available water supply. Metropolitan projects that water supply will be equal to water demand under all climatic conditions considered, such that water supply reliability is 100 percent through the year 2045. This is partly due to the effectiveness of conservation programs implemented throughout the planning period. The projections shown for imported surface water supply availability from Metropolitan indicate that sufficient supplies are available to the City to meet projected demands.

These projections are based upon the City’s 2020 UWMP which reflects population growth associated with the Housing Element Update, as well as additional supplies associated with expansion of the City’s current water supply portfolio through increased conservation and conjunctive use management efforts. Thus, based on the information provided in the UWMP prepared by BWP, there will be sufficient water supply beyond the next eight years and into the planning horizon of 2045. Additionally, new development will be evaluated on a project-by-project basis to ensure that a projects water demand does not exceed projected available supply.

Response I-2.40
The commentor states that the proposed Project underestimates water demand compared to the water availability in the City’s 2020 Urban Water Master Plan (UWMP). The 2030 estimates of water supply vs. water availability in the City’s 2020 Urban Water Master Plan (UWMP) are based on a 2030 Housing Element goal of 10,088 units, as shown in Table 2-1 of the UWMP, not the 10,456 units in the Housing Element. The commentor states that the analysis assumes the City’s allocation of MWD treated water will increase and questions the bases of these assumptions and questions Burbank’s flexibility with the water allocation.

The Housing Element Update would involve up to an estimated 10,456 new housing units in the city.

However, this estimation of the number of units is based on the maximum number of housing opportunity sites available in the city. Similarly, the 10,088 units stated in the UWMP is also an estimation that was collected at the time the UWMP was being prepared. Because the Housing Element update is under development, BWP staff coordinated with the City’s Community Development Department to obtain information related to expected changes to housing growth.

The Housing Element is expected to lay the foundation for achievement of the City’s goal for 12,000 new units through 2035. In which case, the UWMP and analysis under Impact UTIL-2 demonstrate that necessary water supplies would be available.

In regard to MWD treated water, MWD has completed extensive modeling to create management options that will include future variations in supply and demand. Additionally, MWD’s large storage portfolio contains both dry-year storage and emergency storage that can be used to meet demand in case of a shortage. Expanding the range of planning scenarios that MWD considers in their supply and demand modeling will only increase the reliability of this resource for BWP. BWP projects increased demands (as weather conditions get hotter and drier) during multiple dry year scenarios, but projects that there will be enough supply to meet demands. Therefore, BWP’s water supply reliability analysis shows that supplies will meet demands under all hydrologic scenarios from 2025 through 2045. Pursuant to a new requirement, a water supplier must also include in its 2020 UWMP a drought risk assessment (DRA) to compare supplies and demands over a five-year consecutive dry 3-123
ATTACHMENT 12-408
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
period, or extended drought. All supplies assume no reduction in availability over the five-year period due to the drought resilience of local supplies and MWD’s diverse water supply portfolio.

Response I-2.41
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR has failed to explain and define BWRP. In addition, the commentor states the Recirculated Draft EIR must discuss downstream impacts associated with increased flows in the Burbank Western Channel. The commentor also states that the discussion indicates that Burbank may divert wastewater to the Los Angeles sewer system and questions under what conditions this is allowed and states that the Recirculated Draft EIR must provide information on share of capacity currently in use.

As stated in Section 4.12 Utilities/Service Systems, the Burbank Water Reclamation Plan (BWRP), which is owned and operated by the City of Burbank and produces a disinfected tertiary-treated effluent that is approved for all uses, including full body contact, with the exception of human consumption. The BWRP produces up to 10,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) of recycled water, which is available for reuse in any of the following three ways:
 Flowed via gravity pipeline to the BWP campus
 Pumped into the recycled water distribution system
 Discharged to the Burbank Western Channel adjacent to the BWRP, which is tributary to the Los Angeles River
Recycled water produced at the BWRP is used for power production, landscape irrigation, and evaporative cooling. BWP has recently completed a feasibility study of both indirect and direct potable reuse of BWP’s excess recycled water.

Wastewater flows to the BWRP, which has a design capacity of 12.5 million gallons per day (mgd) and currently treats approximately 8.5 mgd. The disinfected tertiary-treated effluent produced by the BWRP is discharged to either the Burbank Western Channel or to the City’s recycled water distribution system for non-potable use. The discharged tertiary-treated effluent meets discharge limitations identified in its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. The BWRP’s effluent also meets the most stringent water quality criteria for recycled water, as defined in the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 3 requirement as Disinfected Tertiary Recycled Water. The City of Burbank Department of Public Works is responsible for maintaining, replacing, and upgrading the City’s sewer collection system.

Response I-2.42
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR must provide links and proper citations to the various plan documents cited in page 4.12-10. In addition, the commentor asks what the key findings of the Burbank Sewer System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan were, including the capacity used and locations in the city more likely to experience capacity issues.

As requested, see the following links to the various documents cited in page 4.12-19. All documents mentioned on page 4.12-19 are publicly available online and may be accessed for additional detail.

Burbank Sewer System Management Plan:
https://www.burbankca.gov/documents/174714/1057471/BurbankSSMPUpdateJuly14202.pdf/ddd 42202-1f2e-e3f4-9100-f50eb6d2e52e?t=1618363811222
3-124
ATTACHMENT 12-409
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
BMC:
https://www.burbankca.gov/web/community-development/planning-zoning The Burbank Sewer System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan (SSECAP) is included in the Burbank Sewer System Management Plan as Chapter 8.

Response I-2.43
The commentor asks if the analysis of water system impacts will address the level of development anticipated in the Housing Element and if not, how long will it take to prepare the analysis of required system upgrades and establish a new fee structure. In addition, the commentor states how will the impacts of individual developments be addressed as described in the Draft EIR, and what are the short term and long-term impacts.

Refer to Response I-2.40 for information on water supply availability for buildout of the proposed Housing Element Update. Refer to Response I-1.9 for information on the Housing Element Updates association with recent State housing policies such as SB 35, SB 9, SB 10 and SB 2011.

As discussed in Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, as individual housing projects are proposed and considered for approval by the City, project proponents would be required to demonstrate that any identified system deficiencies reasonably related to the development project are adequately addressed by the responsible project proponent and future upgrades are designed in accordance with the BMC and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In addition, the City requires applicants to coordinate with the Burbank Fire Department and City of Burbank Building and Safety Division to ensure that existing and planned fire hydrants provide sufficient fire flow pressure requirements.

The City’s issuance of building permits is contingent upon review, testing, and approval that sufficient fire flow pressure is provided for the applicable site. Due to the existing built-up nature of the city, it is reasonably anticipated that future improvements for water supply and fire flow requirements would not disturb previously undisturbed areas and would be situated within existing utility rights-of-way, such as but not limited to within public roadways.

Existing impacts fees were developed by the City and outlined in Title 8 of the BMC. No specific timeline is included as a part of Mitigation Measure UTIL-1 or UTIL-3a for the Sewer Capacity Analysis; however, it is noted that the analysis must be completed as part of the City’s development review process or prior to the submittal of plan check documents, whichever occurs first.

Response I-2.44
The commentor states asks to what extent the Housing Element Update results in redevelopment of properties versus infill development. The commenter suggests that if the Housing Element Update does not consist of redevelopment, statements pertaining to redevelopment should be removed from the Recirculated Draft EIR.

Since all the opportunity sites are currently or formerly developed, the land will be redeveloped to accommodate the additional housing units.

Based on this statement above, statements regarding redevelopment will remain, as they are true to the Housing Element Update.
3-125
ATTACHMENT 12-410
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.45
The commentor notes that the Draft EIR recognizes individual housing developments would be done in accordance with the BMC and BMPs for stormwater management, and that impacts related to the relocation or construction of new wastewater conveyance facilities would be less than significant. However, the commenter states that the impact determination does not appear to be supported by substantial evidence and suggests that the potential for impacts remains. In addition, the commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR concludes that impacts to new or expanded wastewater conveyance associated with the Housing Element would be potentially significant.

Potential impacts would be less than significant due to compliance with existing policies and regulations. Compliance with Sections 9-3-413 and 9-3-414 of the BMC would ensure that future development projects resulting from the Housing and Safety Element Update would be implemented with appropriately sized and sited stormwater conveyance facilities. In the long-term, redevelopment of properties in the city is anticipated to improve the quality of stormwater runoff by replacing older development with new development that incorporates Low Impact Development (LID) methods. LID methods include features such as stormwater detention basins and vegetated swales that slow the velocity of surface runoff and filter some water quality constituents before the runoff percolates to the underlying groundwater system or is conveyed through the City’s, or Los Angeles County Flood Control District’s (LACFCD), stormwater infrastructure. In accordance with the BMC, post-construction stormwater runoff from new projects must be captured and used to the maximum extent practicable, including through the implementation of on-site BMPs for stormwater management. Therefore, while individual housing developments would include site-specific stormwater drainage and conveyance facilities, such facilities would be designed and constructed in accordance with the BMC and BMPs for stormwater. It should be noted that all construction projects in the City must comply with the LID methods.

Response I-2.46
The commentor states that Impact UTIL-1 constitutes as an improper deferral of analysis and mitigation. In addition, the commentor states that the mitigation measure uses words such as “may” that do not mandate performance.

Refer to Response I-2.38 on the appropriateness of Mitigation Measure UTIL-1 and the reason for its implementation. In regard to use of the word “may,” use of “may” is permitted under the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15005 states that “ ‘may’ identifies a permissive element which is left fully to the discretion of the public agencies involved.” Performance would be evaluated by the proper City departments to determine the completeness of the Sewer Capacity Analysis, as required by Mitigation Measure UTIL-1. This measure has been slightly revised based on this comment, refer to Section 4, Errata.

Response I-2.47
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR must provide additional details on what the impacts of a significant unmitigated impact on sewage treatment capacity would mean for residents before system up-grades could be brought on-line and the short-term and long-term impacts.

In the short-term, there is capacity for housing development under the Housing Element update; however, the reason for the significant and unavoidable impact is the long-term impacts that are unknown at this time. As stated in the Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, the Sewer Master Plan will be prepared in fiscal year 2023/24. However, the final recommendations will not be available at 3-126
ATTACHMENT 12-411
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
the time the Housing Element is scheduled to be approved. Individual housing projects will be evaluated on a project-by-project basis to determine their compliance with applicable sewer system requirements, increased demand, and whether additional sewer system development will be necessary to support individual projects.

Response I-2.48
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR needs to address the feasibility of mitigation measure UTIL-3a given the recent changes in State housing law, which creates a larger class of by- right residential development.

Refer to Response I-1.9 for details on recently update State housing laws such as SB 9, SB 10, SB 35 and SB 2011.

According to section 4.12, Utilities/Service System, a sewer capacity analysis shall be required for individual housing projects of five or more multifamily units, so the City may identify sewer infrastructure upgrades that can be implemented by developers when a nexus and rough proportionality is established between proposed project(s) impact to City sewer infrastructure. The sewer capacity analysis must be completed as part of the City’s development review process or prior to the submittal of plan check documents, whichever occurs first.

Response I-2.49
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR needs to address the feasibility of Impact UTIL-3b given the large-scale up-zoning of the region mandated by recent housing element legislation. In addition, the commentor asks what mechanisms put in place to ensure that developers rather than existing residents pay the cost of any diversion to the City of Los Angeles.

According to the Recirculated Draft EIR diverting flows to the Los Angeles system would result in an increase in one-time Sewer Facility Charges (SFCs) and other recurring annual charges (capital improvement and operation & maintenance fees) that shall be paid to the City of Los Angeles. This process is to be completed as part of the City’s development review process. Based on the constraints identified in the analysis under Mitigation Measure UTIL-1, the City’s Public Works Department will prepare a nexus fee study to develop a fair share requirement in the form of a wastewater connection or similar project impact fee, which helps to pay for implementation of upgrades necessary to accommodate future development, including development of the opportunity sites where deficiencies in the system are identified to exist. Through the fee study, subsequent cost recovery fees applied to individual housing development projects will be based on a rough proportionality related to demands on the system reasonably attributed to the development project.

Response I-2.50
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR needs to address the potential impacts of UTIL-3d.

Mitigation Measures UTIL-3d is a long-term solution for the wastewater impacts; however, the details associated with the anticipated expansion and upgrades to BWRP facilities is unknown at this time, which is one of the reasons for the determination that the impacts to wastewater are significant and unavoidable. The potential impacts associated with the capacity and conveyance expansion and upgrades will require its own environmental analysis when the details are determined.
3-127
ATTACHMENT 12-412
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Response I-2.51
The commentor asks what percent of the existing stormwater conveyance system is used during peak periods and what is the remaining capacity during the dry, wet seasons, and during more intense storm events.

The individual housing developments facilitated by the Housing Element Update will be evaluated on a project-by-project basis to determine the potential impacts associated with stormwater quality and quantity.

The purpose of the local storm drain system, which is primarily owned and operated by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, is to convey urban and stormwater runoff to the local waterways, which are commonly known as the Lockheed Channel, the Burbank Western Channel, the Burbank Eastern Channel, and the Los Angeles River. This purpose of the local storm drain system is aimed at preventing local flooding and it was designed and constructed prior to new and evolving National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater quality regulations.

The evolving stormwater regulations subject the City of Burbank and other public agencies in Los Angeles County to two primary requirements:
1) During dry-weather conditions, no urban runoff should be entering the local storm drain system, with the exception of the few conditionally exempt non-stormwater discharges. As the prolonged drought potentially continues, urban runoff will be minimized as local water purveyors are tasked with prohibiting many outdoor water uses. As a whole, the City of Burbank is tasked with prohibiting urban runoff discharges from entering the local storm drain system; and
2) During wet-weather conditions, the City of Burbank must design and build Stormwater Improvements as stipulated in the approved Upper Los Angeles River Enhanced Wat ershed
Management Program (ULAR EWMP). The inte nt of these Stormwater Improvements is to divert stormwater runoff from entering local waterways to direct these flows for capture and A) infiltration, B) beneficial reuse, C) to be slowly introduced into the local sanitary sewer system for treatment and expanded use of recycled water, and D) as a last resort, for treatment and release into local waterways.

At this time, nearly 100% of the storm drain conveyance system is used during significant wet- weathe
r events.

During dry-weather events, the City of Burbank continues to investigate sources of urban runoff that may be illicit discharges entering the local storm drain system, to prevent non-storm water discharges (dry-weather flows) from entering local waterways. As such, only a minimal portion of the storm drain conveyance system’s available capacity should be utilized.

Finally, once the City of Burbank begins designing and constructing additional large-scale Stormwater Improvements per the ULAR EWMP, the City would be able to better quantify the revised capacities for the storm drain conveyance system during both dry-weather and wet-weather conditions.

Response I-2.52
The commentor states if Burbank met its AB 939 and SB 1016 targets.

The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) requires each jurisdiction to divert 50% of its solid waste from being disposed in landfills. Cities, such as Burbank, were required 3-128
ATTACHMENT 12-413
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
to prepare and implement plans to achieve 25% waste reduction from 1995 through 1999 and 50% waste reduction from the year 2000 and thereafter. Under AB 939, the City achieved compliance through a combination of reaching the 50% diversion mandate and showing a good faith effort in implementing diversion programs.

For 2007 and subsequent years, CalRecycle introduced a new diversion measurement system under SB 1016, which was based on a City's population and disposal tons to calculate a per capita disposal rate expressed in pounds per person per day. SB 1016 builds on AB 939 compliance requirements by implementing a simplified measure of the City's recycling performance. Under this measurement system, a city needs to annually dispose of an amount equal to or less than its "50 percent equivalent per capita disposal target" calculated by CalRecycle. Since the implementation of the revised diversion measurement system under SB1016, Burbank has achieved compliance by remaining below the calculated per capita disposal target set by the State.

Response I-2.53
The commentor asks if there are more recent updates to the County of Los Angeles Integrated Waste Management Plan (ColWMP).

At the time of preparation of the Administrative Draft EIR, the 2012 annual report of the CoIWMP was the most recent document found online. Since preparation, the 2019 annual report was completed in September 2020. Nonetheless, this plan was referenced in the Regulatory Setting of Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, to provide the background for regional policies associated with waste management. As such, the updated report does not result in any revisions to the analysis presented in the Recirculated Draft EIR.

Response I-2.54
The commentor asks how much the Project will reduce the longevity of the Burbank landfill and other landfills which may serve the city.

As discussed under Impact UTIL-4 in Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, the City owns and operates the Burbank Landfill, located in the Verdugo Hills at the eastern edge of Burbank, which is expected to have an operational lifetime through year 2150. If all 10,456 new housing units included under the proposed Project are constructed as multi-family residential units, this equates to approximately 40,352 lbs/day (20.2 tons) of solid waste. The Burbank Landfill has average daily available permitted capacity of 117 tons (192 cy) per day, or approximately 49 percent of the permitted daily intake. Accordingly, sufficient solid waste disposal capacity is available at Burbank Landfill to meet the potential needs associated with reasonably foreseeable development under the proposed Project. In addition to the Burbank Landfill, approximately 50 percent of new waste from multi-family residential development generated in Burbank will be transported to and disposed of at seven other southern California landfills including Burbank Landfill Site No. 3, Chiquita Canyon Sanitary Landfill, Sunshine Canyon City/County Landfill, Simi Valley Landfill and Recycling Center, Puente Hills Landfill, Lancaster Landfill and Recycling Center, and Olinda Alpha Sanitary Landfill, which will lower their lifespans while still maintaining sufficient capacity.

Potential impacts from future residential development projects facilitated by the Housing Element will be mitigated through payment of fees charged for new development commensurate with the cost to transport the waste out of the city, and the proposed Project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Although, new sources of solid waste will contribute to reaching the capacity of the landfill at 3-129
ATTACHMENT 12-414
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
a greater rate, the analysis adequately analyzes the potential impacts to address the CEQA thresholds associated with waste generation.

Response I-2.55
The commentor asks if there is a maximum number of GWhs that can be supplied by BWP and if so, what is it.

In Section 4 Utilities/Service System, the Recirculated Draft EIR states that according to the California Energy Commission, in 2020 BWP had a total usage of 995.1 Gigawatt hours (GWh).

Residential uses consisted of the second most energy intensive source (287.6 GWh) for BWP, behind commercial and building (507.8 GWh). BWP’s power mix from the power content label (PCL), which shows total generation delivered for a calendar year, divided by retail sales (not renewable energy credits retired) for 2020 consisted of approximately 31 percent renewable resources (wind, geothermal, biomass, solar, and small hydroelectric), 26 percent coal, 31 percent natural gas, eight percent nuclear, two percent hydroelectric, and the remainder from other sources.

The CEQA thresholds associated with energy include the relocation or construction of new or expanded electric power facilities; wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources; and potential conflicts with a state or local plan for renewable energy. The Initial Study and Recirculated Draft EIR provided analyses that addresses each of these thresholds. No additional analysis is needed.

Response I-2.56
The commentor asks what percent of Burbank’s electricity is procured by renewable and nonrenewable sources. In addition, the commentor stats to provide a breakdown of the source.

Please refer to Response I-2.56 for detail on BWP’s power mix and availability of power from renewable sources.

Response I-2.57
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR needs to quantify the existing peak period electrical supply and demand, transmission capabilities, projected increase in electrical demand resulting from the project, and identify any system deficiencies.

According to Section 6, Energy, of Appendix B, Initial Study, long-term operation of new projects developed in accordance with the Housing Element Update would require permanent grid connections for electricity and natural gas service to power internal and exterior building lighting, and heating and cooling systems. Reasonably foreseeable development under the Housing Element Update would be subject to the energy conservation requirements of the California Energy Code (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations, California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings), the California Green Building Standards Code (Title 24, Part 11 of the California Code of Regulations). The Code emphasizes saving energy at peak periods and seasons and improving the quality of installation of energy efficiency measures. The California Green Building Standards Code sets targets for energy efficiency; water consumption; dual plumbing systems for potable and recyclable water; diversion of construction waste from landfills; and use of environmentally sensitive materials in construction and design, including ecofriendly flooring, carpeting, paint, coatings, thermal insulation, and acoustical wall and ceiling panels. 3-130
ATTACHMENT 12-415
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Construction activity associated with individual projects under the Housing Update would be required to comply with applicable City and State energy efficiency regulations and standards, which would ensure that the proposed Project would not conflict with renewable energy and energy efficiency plans adopted by the City. Further analysis of this issue in the EIR is not needed. The Housing Element Update, in and of itself, is a policy document and does not propose specific housing developments. Thus, at the programmatic level, there is sufficient energy to supply the projects under the Housing Element Update, however individual projects must go through their own CEQA analysis to identify energy demand and transmission capabilities.

Response I-2.58
The commentor states that BWP needs to be consulted to assess whether the existing fee structure anticipated the level of development that would result from the Housing element. In addition, the commentor states that BWP needs to be consulted to address significant electrical transmission system impacts.

Please refer to Response I-2.28 for detail on consultation with BWP. When a Project is proposed, an engineering feasibility study is performed at the developer’s cost. The feasibility study identifies the method of service, the impacts to the electric system, the upgrades needed, the cost to provide new electric service, and the cost to upgrade or mitigate any impacts to the electric system. These costs are called aid-in-construction (AIC) fees. The developer pays the full cost of AIC fees prior to the start of construction. BWP has reviewed and commented on the document. Additionally, BWP is conducting a high-level analysis in the Electrical Distribution Masterplan update.

Response I-2.59
The commentor states that Southern California Gas (SCG) supplied a total of 5.2 billion therms of natural gas in 2019 and questions if there is a maximum number of therms that can be supplied by SCG. In addition, the commentor asks for the demand generated by the Project.

For additional information on SCG gas capacity please refer to the 2020 California Gas Report, linked below: https://www.socalgas.com/sites/default/files/2020- 10/2020_California_Gas_Report_Joint_Utility_Biennial_Comprehensive_Filing.pdf The Housing Element Update, in and of itself, is a planning document and does not specifically propose individual housing developments. Individual housing developments will be evaluated on a project-by-project basis to determine increased demand for natural gas and the potential impacts of those increases. The analysis provided in the Recirculated Draft EIR is adequate to meet the needs of the analysis. No additional changes are required.

Response I-2.60
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR must provide citations and links for the information provided regarding gas demand.

Please refer to the link provided in Response I-2.59.

Response I-2.61
The commentor states that the Recirculated Draft EIR’s cumulative impact analysis is too general and fails to include a list of cumulative projects list or summary of projections. 3-131
ATTACHMENT 12-416
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Refer to Response I-1.8 in Section 2, Responses to Comments on Draft EIR, as this comment was previously submitted and responded to therein. Cumulative impacts are adequately discussed within the Recirculated Draft EIR. CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 of states:
“The discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, but the discussion need not provide as great detail as is provided for the effects attributable to the project alone. The discussion should be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness, and should focus on the cumulative impact to which the identified other projects contribute rather than the attributes of other projects which do not contribute to the cumulative impact.”
The discussion of cumulative impacts in each impact analysis section describes the cumulative direct and indirect impacts of the adoption of the Housing Element Update. Individual housing projects facilitated by the Housing Element Update will have their cumulative impacts analyzed on a project- by-project basis.

Response I-2.62
The commenter thanks the City in advance for their consideration and for correcting the fatal EIR flaws and more accurately disclosing to Burbank residents the impacts of the Project and cumulative law changes.

Refer to the responses above for more detail regarding commenter’s specific concerns; no additional response is needed for this comment.
3-132
ATTACHMENT 12-417
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Planning Board
Public Comment Meeting August 22, 2022
Comment S-1
COMMENTER: Joshua Christensen, Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (Representative) Response S-1.1
The commenter noted that most residential construction workers are not unionized and rely on government public assistance for benefits such as health care and childcare. The commenter noted that it costs taxpayers approximately $3 billion annually to provide for this public assistance.

The comment is noted. However, the comment does not raise issues with the adequacy of the analysis or conclusions in the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR is not intended or required to provide justification for the Project.

Response S-1.2
The commenter asked for addition of provisions into the Housing and Safety Element Update that requires all workers to receive a fair wage, healthcare, and that all contractors that are bidding for projects in the City will provide background report which includes previous jobs, past violations and where their workers are commuting from.

Implementation of the requirement to use a local skilled and trained workforce is beyond the scope of the Draft EIR since labor and employment is not a required topic under CEQA. Nonetheless, the commenter’s recommendations are noted for review and consideration by the City’s decision- makers. Refer to Response for Letters O-3 through O-7 regarding the request for labor standards and/or policies.

Response S-1.3
Commenter noted long commute times of construction workers to jobs and the importance of hiring local workers.

Implementation of the requirement to use a local skilled and trained workforce is beyond the scope of the Draft EIR since labor and employment is not a required topic under CEQA. Nonetheless, the commenter’s recommendations are noted for review and consideration by the City’s decision- makers.
3-133
ATTACHMENT 12-418
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Comment S-2
COMMENTER: Jarred Langford, Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (Member) Response S-2.1
The commenter noted that he is a member of Carpenters Local 661 and offered an introduction to the labor union. The commenter stated that labor standards and policies need to be incorporated into Housing Elements in order to protect construction workers. He noted that many construction workers in the Burbank area do not receive health care from their jobs, work for low wages, have to commute long distances for jobs and rely on government subsistence.

Refer to Response for Letters O-3 through O-7 regarding the request for labor standards and/or policies.

Response S-2.1
The commenter supported Section 2.5.1 of the Housing Element Updated line-item but suggested a revision to make it more clear. The commenter’s time ran out before revisions were stated.

The commenter wrote Letter O-2 requesting specific revisions to Section 2.5.1. Refer to the Response to Letter O-2 and Response to Comment S-4 regarding the request for revisions.

Comment S-3
COMMENTER: Chuck Powell, Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (Member) Response S-3.1
The commenter noted the need for affordable housing in the Burbank area.

This comment does not pertain to the adequacy of the EIR. Nonetheless, in response to the comment, the purpose of the 15 percent buffer above the RHNA allocation under the Housing Element is to include a sufficient buffer in the Inventory of Sites to accommodate future reductions in the sites identified for affordable housing as they are developed with another use during the eight-year cycle. Therefore, the proposed Project would contribute to development of affordable housing.

Response S-3.2
The commenter requested a local hire for new building in the area, so local construction workers don’t have such long commute times in order to work in locations such as Los Angeles International Airport.

Implementation of the requirement to use a local skilled and trained workforce is beyond the scope of the Draft EIR since labor and employment is not a required topic under CEQA. Nonetheless, the commenter’s recommendations are noted for review and consideration by the City’s decision- makers.
3-134
ATTACHMENT 12-419
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report
Comment S-4
COMMENTER: Jarred Langford, Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (Member) Response S-4.1
Commenter provided a recommendation for Section 2.5.1. The commenter suggested to strike through and remove “that require an economic feasibility analysis to evaluate the potential impact of adding workforce training and prevailing wage requirements to new housing.” The commenter suggested the addition of “the implementation of a local hire, apprenticeship policy to have the skills construction workforce necessary to produce an ample supply of mixed income and affordable housing units and ensure equitable sustainable and livable communities.”.

The commenters’ requests for changes Section 2.5.1 of the Housing Element Update are noted but does not raise issues with the adequacy of the analysis or conclusions in the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR is not intended or required to provide justification for the Project. Rather, the EIR is an informational document that is intended to provide public agencies and the public with detailed information about the effect that the Project is likely to have on the environment. This EIR also identifies ways in which the significant effects might be minimized and identifies alternatives to the Project. The City is not required to consider such comments or requests to change the Project in its CEQA analysis absent a commenter providing substantial evidence that the proposed change would feasibly reduce one or more significant adverse environmental impacts identified in the Draft EIR.

Requests for changes to the Project may be addressed through the planning process outside of the CEQA process.
3-135
ATTACHMENT 12-420
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report

This page intentionally left blank.
3-136
ATTACHMENT 12-421
Errata to the Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report 4-1
4 Errata to the Draft EIR
This Errata addresses proposed refinements and revisions to the Draft EIR. In-text deletions are noted by strikeout and in-text insertions by underline. Individual typographical corrections are not specifically indicated here. The revisions are organized by section and page number. As discussed below, none of the conditions in Section 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines would be met because revisions would not result in a significant change or an increase in the severity of any identified impact, and an additional recirculation of the Draft EIR is not required.

Effect of In-Text Revisions
As demonstrated by the following discussion, the in-text revisions to the Project would not result in new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and therefore do not warrant recirculation of the EIR.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 requires that an EIR that has been made available for public review, but not yet certified, be recirculated only if significant new information has been added to the EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(c), the entire document need not be circulated if revisions are limited to specific portions of the document. The relevant portions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 read as follows:
(a) A lead agency is required to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR for public review under Section 15087 but before certification. As used in this section, the term “information” can include changes in the project or environmental setting as well as additional data or other information. New information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement. “Significant new information” requiring recirculation include, for example, a disclosure showing that:
1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented.
2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 3) A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it.
4) The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded. (b) Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR.

The information contained in this Errata makes insignificant changes to the information that has already been presented in the Draft EIR. In addition, the minor refinements are not significant ATTACHMENT 12-422
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

4-2
because the EIR is not changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the Project. As described below, the proposed revisions would not result in any new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any impact already identified in the Draft EIR, Recirculated Draft EIR, or Final EIR. Thus, none of the conditions in Section 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines are met and recirculation is not required.

Air Quality
The following revision was made to update policy numbering in Section 4.1, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR:

Section 4.1 – Page 4.1-26
Policy 3.8: 3.9: Encourage use of sustainable and green building design in new and existing housing.

Utilities/Service Systems
The following revision was made to Section 4.12, Utilities/Service Systems, of the Recirculated Draft EIR:

Section 4.12 – Page 4.12-5
The Project is subject to CEQA and includes more than 500 dwelling units. However, the Housing Element is a planning document, not a development project, and it therefore does not directly trigger the need for a WSA as defined by California Water Code. The scope of the EIR for the Housing Element was programmatic, so the analysis focused on the UWMP analysis with input from BWP in lieu of a WSA. Nonetheless, a WSA was prepared for the Housing Element to provide a well-informed analysis of potential impacts to water supply availability and reliability.

Section 4.12 – Page 4.12-2
UTIL-1 Sewer Service Constraints Analysis
The City will conduct an analysis to identify any sewer service constraints to determine if there are any sewer capacity issues and any constraints in the City’s wastewater system including assessment of system capacity relative to the locations of opportunity sites identified in the Housing Element Update. The analysis will identify upgrades necessary to mitigate the constraints in the system to ensure that individual housing development projects implemented under the Housing Element can be completed and that sufficient capacity and conveyance in the wastewater system exists. However, if a proposed development has a construction schedule that the City cannot accommodate, the developer may be responsible for performing the necessary sewer infrastructure upgrades per Burbank Municipal Code (BMC) 8-1-304.

Based on the constraints identified in the analysis, the City’s Public Works Department will prepare a nexus fee study to develop a fair share requirement in the form of a wastewater connection or similar project impact fee, which helps to pay for implementation of upgrades necessary to accommodate future development, including development of the opportunity sites where deficiencies in the system are identified to exist. Through the fee study, ATTACHMENT 12-423
Errata to the Draft EIR

Final Environmental Impact Report 4-3
subsequent cost recovery fees applied to individual housing development projects will be based on a rough proportionality related to demands on the system reasonably attributed to the development project.

In the event it is determined that necessary upgrades to serve a project cannot be completed by the City prior to project completion, the City may require the developer to perform the necessary sewer infrastructure upgrades (Per BMC 8-1-304) at cost to the developer, or the City can may choose to enter into a reimbursement agreement so that a developer shall may fund and construct the improvements within the necessary timeframe with subsequent partial reimbursement. If the City and Developer mutually agree to enter into reimbursement agreement (approved as to form by the City Attorney and approved by the City Council), it would be administered by the City’s Public Works Director on behalf of the City.

Appendix B – Initial Study
In response to a comment provide by the Department of Conservation, the following revisions were made to update analysis in Appendix B, Initial Study, of the Draft EIR:

Section 7, Geology and Soils – Page 35
a.3. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which loose, saturated, granular soils behave similarly to a fluid when subjected to high-intensity ground shaking. Liquefaction occurs when three general conditions exist: shallow groundwater; low density, fine, clean sandy soils; and strong ground motion. Liquefaction-related effects include loss of bearing strength, amplified ground oscillations, lateral spreading, and flow failures.

According to the DOC Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation map, portions of the City are at risk of seismically induced liquefaction (DOC 2020c). As mentioned above, development in Burbank is required to adhere to the UBC and CBC. Compliance with City and State building codes would reduce impacts associated with liquefaction from seismic ground shaking with current engineering practices and the proposed Project would not exacerbate liquefaction potential in the area. Individual housing projects facilitated by the Housing Element Update that occur in a zone of required investigation (ZORI) for liquefaction would be subject to comply with the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act. Per the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, development occurring within a ZORI for liquefaction, a site- specific investigation by a qualified engineering geologist and/or civil engineer may be required before development on the site is permitted. As such, reasonably foreseeable development under the Housing Element Update would not directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects from liquefaction risk, and the Safety Element and Environmental Justice updates would not result in development that would create geologic impacts. Impacts would be less than significant and further analysis of this issue in an EIR is not warranted.

ATTACHMENT 12-424
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

4-4
Section 7, Geology and Soils – Page 35
The geologic character of an area determines its potential for landslides. Steep slopes, the extent of erosion, and the rock composition of a hillside all contribute to the potential for slope failure and landslide events. In order to fail, unstable slopes need to be disturbed; common triggering mechanisms of slope failure include undercutting slopes by erosion or grading, saturation of marginally stable slopes by rainfall or irrigation; and, shaking of marginally stable slopes during earthquakes. The topography of the City of Burbank is generally flat, although the northeastern portion of development in the City is situated along the foothills of the Verdugo Mountains. According to the DOC Earthquake Zones of Required investigation map, several single-family residential parcels located north of Bel Aire Drive in the northeast portion of the City have been identified as potential areas for landslides, but the majority of the City is not located in a landslide zone (DOC 2020c) and housing sites identified in the Housing Element Update are not located along the foothills. In addition, the housing opportunity sites identified in the Housing Element Update are not located in a ZORI for earthquake-induced landslides, and thus, would not be subject to requirements established by the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act. No additional investigations regarding earthquake-induced landslide risk would be required for these sites. However, any housing that may occur in the landslide zone in the northeast portion of the City would be subject to requirements established by the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act. In addition, the The Safety Element and Environmental Justice updates would not result in development that would create geologic impacts. Therefore, development under the proposed Project would not directly or indirectly cause impacts related to landslides. Potential impacts would be less than significant and further analysis of this issue is not warranted.

Conclusion
Based on the information presented above, the revised policy number in Section 4.1, Air Quality, and revisions to Section 7, Geology and Soils, of the Initial Study (Appendix B) would not result in any new significant impacts, the substantial increase in severity of an impact already identified in the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR, or disclose a feasible alternative or mitigation measure that have been declined to adopt. Thus, none of the conditions in Section 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines are met and an additional recirculation of the Draft EIR is not required.

ATTACHMENT 12-425
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-1
5 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program
CEQA requires adoption of a reporting or monitoring program for the conditions of project approval that are necessary to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). This mitigation monitoring and reporting program is intended to track and ensure compliance with adopted mitigation measures during the Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update implementation phase. For each mitigation measure recommended in the Final EIR for the Project, specifications are made herein that identify the action required, the monitoring that must occur, and the agency or department responsible for oversight.

As a programmatic EIR, the mitigation measures included herein apply to individual projects, and as such, the cost for any studies and/or monitoring to implement the project-level mitigation measure shall be borne by the developer.

ATTACHMENT 12-426
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-2
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
Air Quality
AQ-1 Construction Emissions Reduction
For projects that would include any of the following:
demolition of more 13,500 square feet of building
area, greater than 5,000 cubic yards of soil cut/fill,
greater than 5-acres of graded area, or use of more
than ten pieces of heavy-duty construction
equipment and 150 truck trips on any given day
during demolition, site clearing, or grading, prior to
issuance of a permit to construct and at the
expense of the project applicant, the City shall
retain a qualified air quality analyst to prepare an
Air Quality Impact Analysis to analyze construction
emissions. The air quality analysis shall demonstrate
that project emissions are less than applicable
SCAQMD regional and LST thresholds, and as
applicable may include, but is not limited to, the
following mitigations:
 Off-road diesel-powered construction
equipment greater than 50 horsepower shall
meet the USEPA Tier 4 emission standards,
where available. In the event that Tier 4 engines
are not available for any off-road equipment
larger than 100 horsepower, that equipment
shall be equipped with a Tier 3 engine or an
engine that is equipped with retrofit controls to
reduce exhaust emissions of NO
x and DPM to no
more than Tier 3 levels unless certified by
engine manufacturers or the onsite air quality
construction mitigation manager that the use of
such devices is not practical for specific engine
types.
 All construction equipment shall be outfitted
with best available control technology (BACT)
devices certified by CARB. Any emissions control
device used by the contractor shall achieve
emissions reductions that are no less
Verify retention of a
qualified air quality analyst
to evaluate project-specific
construction emissions in an
Air Quality Impact Analysis
for projects with
construction activities that
exceed the screening
criteria.

Review and approval of the
Air Quality Impact Analysis.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-427
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-3
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
AQ-1 Construction Emissions Reduction (cont’d)
than what could be achieved by a Level 3
diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly
sized engine as defined by CARB regulations.
 Consistent with SCAQMD Rule 403,
construction contractors shall identify and
implement best available dust control
measures during active construction
operations capable of generating dust.

AQ-2 Operations Emissions Reduction
For any project that would include more than 553
single-family residential units, 710 multi-family
residential units, or any equivalent combination
thereof, prior to issuance of a permit to construct,
and at the expense of the project applicant, the City
shall retain a qualified air quality analyst to prepare an Air Quality Impact Analysis to analyze
operational emissions The air quality analysis shall
demonstrate that project emissions are less than
applicable SCAQMD regional and LST thresholds,
and as applicable may include, but is not limited to,
the following mitigation:
 Implementation of a Transportation Demand
Management Plan.
 Installation of additional electric vehicle
charging stations
 Public infrastructure improvements (e.g.,
bus stop shelter improvements)
 Carpool or ridesharing programs
 Subsidized transit costs
 Unbundled parking costs
 Bicycle amenities (storage, showers, lockers,
etc.)
Verify retention of a
qualified air quality analyst
to evaluate project-specific
operation emissions in an
Air Quality Impact Analysis
for projects with a
residential unit count that
exceeds the screening
criteria.

Review and approval of the
Air Quality Impact Analysis.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-428
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-4
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
AQ-2 Operations Emissions Reduction (cont’)
 Use of all-electric appliances (i.e., elimination of
natural gas service)
 Use solar or low emission water heaters that
exceed Title 24 requirements
 Increased walls and attic insulation beyond Title
24 requirements
 Required use of electric lawnmowers, leaf-
blowers, and chainsaws

Biological Resources
BIO-1 Biological Resources Avoidance
For individual housing developments that will
include disturbance of vegetation, trees, structures,
or other areas where biological resources could be
present, a qualified biologist shall be retained by
the applicant to conduct an initial site assessment
that will include review of the California Natural
Diversity Database (CNDDB) and iNaturalist maps to
determine where sightings have occurred or
habitats for the least Bell’s vireo, bat species, or
monarch butterflies have previously been
identified.

If construction activities or other disturbances occur
in areas within 500 feet of a previously identified
habitat or observation according to CNDDB or
iNaturalist, the following measures shall be
implemented:
 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a
qualified biologist shall be retained by the
project applicant to conduct a biological
resources reconnaissance of the site. The
qualified biologist shall thoroughly report on the
biological resources present on a project site
and submitted to the City.

Verification that the project
applicant has retained a
qualified biologist to
prepare an initial site
assessment.

If project construction/
disturbances occur within
500 feet of an identified
resource, verification that
the project applicant has
retained a qualified
biologist to report on the
site.

If qualified biologist
identifies the potential for
special-status species or
habitat for special-status
wildlife, verification that
focused surveys are
completed in accordance
with applicable protocols.

Review and approval of the
biological resources report.

Prior to the issuance of
a grading permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-429
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-5
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
BIO-1 Biological Resources Avoidance (cont’d)
 If the biologist determines that special-status
species may occur, focused surveys for special-
status plants shall be completed in accordance
with Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating
Impacts to Special Status Native Plant
Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities
(California Department of Fish and Wildlife
[CDFW], March 20, 2018) and Guidelines for
Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories
for Federally Listed, Proposed and Candidate
Plants (USFWS, September 23, 1996). If it is
determined that the project site has suitable
habitat for special-status wildlife, focused
surveys shall be conducted to determined
presence/absence including species-specific
surveys in accordance with CDFW or United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
protocols for State or federally listed species,
respectively, that may occur.
 If it is determined that a special-status species
may be impacted by a specific project,
consultation with USFWS and/or CDFW shall
occur prior to issuance of a development permit
from the City to determine measures to address
impacts, such as avoidance, minimization, or
take authorization and mitigation. The report
shall include a list of special-status plants and
wildlife that may occur on the project site
and/or adjacent area.

If construction activities or other disturbances occur
during the bird nesting season (February 1 through
August 31), prior to issuance of grading permits for
individual housing developments that will include
disturbance of vegetation, structures, or other areas
where bird nests could be present, the following
requirements shall be implemented
If project will impact
special-status species,
verification that the USFWS
and CDFW is consulted
immediately to address
impacts.

Verification that the project
applicant has retained a
qualified biologist to
prepare a pre-construction
bird survey if project
construction/disturbances
occur within bird nesting
season (February 1 – August
31).

At latest, seven days
prior to initiation of
grading or
construction activities
Once Same as above
Review and approval of pre-
construction bird survey.

Prior to initiation of
grading or
construction activities
Once Same as above
If nests are found, field
verification that avoidance
buffers are demarcated and
enforced.

Upon discovery of
active nests
Continuous;
throughout
construction
activities near
active nests
Same as above
Review and approval of
survey report prepared by
qualified biologist.

Upon compliance with
requirements and
applicable State and
Federal regulations
Once Same as above
ATTACHMENT 12-430
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-6
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
BIO-1 Biological Resources Avoidance (cont’d)
 Applicant shall submit a pre-construction
nesting bird survey shall be conducted no more
than seven days prior to initiation of grading or
construction activities. The nesting bird pre-
construction survey shall be conducted on foot
on the construction site, including a 100-foot
buffer, and in inaccessible areas (e.g., private
lands) from afar using binoculars to the extent
practical. The survey shall be conducted by a
qualified biologist familiar with the
identification of avian species known to occur in
southern California and a copy of the study shall
be submitted to the Community Development
Department and Building and Safety Division.

The cost to hire a qualified biologist shall be
borne entirely by the developer/project
applicant.
 If nests are found, an avoidance buffer shall be
demarcated by a qualified biologist with bright
orange construction fencing, flagging,
construction lathe, or other means to mark the
boundary. All construction personnel shall be
notified as to the existence of the buffer zone
and to avoid entering the buffer zone during the
nesting season. No parking, storage of
materials, or construction activities shall occur
within this buffer until the biologist has
confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed,
and the young have fledged the nest.

Encroachment into the buffer shall occur only at
the discretion of the qualified biologist.
 A survey report shall be prepared by the
qualified biologist documenting and verifying
compliance with the above requirements and
applicable State and Federal regulations
protecting birds that shall be submitted to the
City of Burbank. The qualified biologist shall

ATTACHMENT 12-431
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-7
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
BIO-1 Biological Resources Avoidance (cont’d)
serve as a construction monitor during those
periods when construction activities would
occur near active nest areas to ensure that no
inadvertent impacts on these nests would occur.

Cultural Resources
CUL-1 Historic Resource Protection
The project proponent shall either:
a) Demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City of
Burbank Community Development Department
that the project does not contain any historic
resources either due to the site being vacant,
age of the structures on the site, or due to the
result of the Program LU-4 Historic Preservation
Plan determination; or
b) For any structure determined to be eligible for
listing on a federal, State, or local registry, or
currently listed, as a historic resource (typically
determined as a result of the Program LU-4
Historic Preservation Plan process), project
activities shall comply with the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties (Standards). During the project
planning phase (prior to any construction
activities), input shall be sought from a qualified
architectural historian or historic architect
meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualifications Standards to ensure
project compliance with the Standards for
Rehabilitation. The cost of this assessment shall
be borne entirely by the project applicant. This
input will ensure the avoidance of any
direct/indirect physical changes to historical
resources. The findings
Verification that the project
applicant has adequately
demonstrated the project
does not contain historic
resources.

If project contains eligible or
currently listed historic
structure, verification that
the project applicant has
retained a qualified
architectural historian or
historic architect (meeting
the Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards) to
assess the project.

Review and approval of
Standards Project Review
Memorandum and
recommendations.

Prior to project design
approval
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-432
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-8
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
CUL-1 Historic Resource Protection (cont’d)
and recommendations of the architectural historian
or historic architect shall be documented in a
Standards Project Review Memorandum at the
schematic design phase. This memorandum shall
analyze all project components for compliance with
the Standards for Rehabilitation. Project
components to be analyzed shall include direct and
indirect changes to historical resources and their
setting. should design modifications be necessary to
bring projects into compliance with the Standards
for Rehabilitation, the memorandum will document
those recommendations, which will then become
conditions of project approval. The report will be
submitted to the City for review and approval.

CUL-2(a) Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological Resources Prior to the commencement of any ground-
disturbing activities, a qualified archaeologist shall
be retained to conduct a Worker’s Environmental
Awareness Program (WEAP) training on
archaeological sensitivity for all construction
personnel. The training shall be conducted by an
archaeologist who meets or exceeds the Secretary
of Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for
archaeology. Archaeological sensitivity training will
include a description of the types of cultural
material that may be encountered, cultural
sensitivity issues, regulatory issues, and the proper
protocol for treatment of the materials in the event
of a find.

In the event of the unanticipated discovery of
archaeological materials, the project applicant shall
immediately cease all work activities in the area
(within approximately 100 feet) of the
Verification that the project
applicant has retained a
qualified archaeologist
(meeting the Secretary of
the Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards) to
conduct WEAP training.

Prior to the start of
construction activities
and during ground-
disturbing activities, as
needed
Continuous;
throughout
ground-
disturbing
activities
City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

If archaeological materials
are found, field verification
that all work activities
within 100 feet have
ceased.

Upon discovery of
archaeological
materials
Continuous;
throughout
ground-
disturbing
activities
Same as above
ATTACHMENT 12-433
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-9
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
CUL-2(a) Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological Resources (cont’d) discovery until it can be evaluated by a qualified
archaeologist. Construction shall not resume until
the qualified archaeologist has conferred with the
City on the significance of the resource. If it is
determined that the discovered archaeological
resource constitutes a historical resource or unique
archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA,
avoidance and preservation in place shall be the
preferred manner of mitigation. Preservation in
place maintains the important relationship between
artifacts and their archaeological context and also
serves to avoid conflict with traditional and religious values of groups who may ascribe meaning to the
resource. Preservation in place may be
accomplished by, but is not limited to, avoidance,
incorporating the resource into open space,
capping, or deeding the site into a permanent
conservation easement. In the event that
preservation in place is determined to be infeasible
and data recovery through excavation is the only
feasible mitigation available, an Archaeological
Resources Treatment Plan shall be prepared and
implemented by the qualified archaeologist in
consultation with the City that provides for the
adequate recovery of the scientifically
consequential information contained in the
archaeological resource. The City shall consult with
appropriate Native American representatives in
determining treatment for prehistoric or Native
American resources to ensure cultural values
ascribed to the resource, beyond that which is
scientifically important, are considered.

If archaeological materials
are found, consultation with
retained qualified
archaeologist to determine
treatment of resource.

If archaeological materials
of Native American origin
are found, consultation with
Native American
representatives to
determine treatment of
resource.

Upon discovery of
archaeological
materials
Continuous;
until
consultation is
complete
Same as above
If data recovery through
excavation is the only
feasible mitigation
available, review and
approval of Archaeological
Resources Treatment Plan.

Upon completion of
consultation
Once Same as above
ATTACHMENT 12-434
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-10
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
CUL-2(b) Archaeological and Native Monitors
During initial ground disturbing activities related to
the proposed project, both a qualified archaeologist
and a locally affiliated Native American monitor
shall monitor construction activities within the
project site in accordance with City of Burbank
Historic Resource Management Ordinance, Program
LU-4: Historic Preservation Plan. Initial ground
disturbance is defined as disturbance within
previously undisturbed native soils. If, during initial ground disturbance, the qualified archaeologist
determines that the construction activities have
little or no potential to impact cultural resources
(e.g., excavations are within previously disturbed,
non-native soils, or within soil formation not
expected to yield cultural resources deposits), the
qualified archaeologist may recommend that
monitoring be reduced or eliminated, in
consultation with the Native American monitor.

Verification that a qualified
archaeologist and a locally
affiliated Native American
monitor have been retained
to monitor construction
activities.

Prior to the start of
construction activities
Once City of Burbank
Community
Development
Department

If qualified archaeologist
confirms little or no
potential to impact
resources, review and
approval of
recommendation that
monitoring be reduced or
eliminated.

During initial ground
disturbance
Once Same as above
Geology/Soils
GEO-1(a) Paleontological Resources Management
Housing development projects that require ground
disturbance (grading, trenching, foundation work,
and other excavations) beyond five feet below
ground surface (bgs) on a site located in an area
mapped as Quaternary young (Holocene) alluvial
fan deposits (Qyf, Qf) where it was not previously
excavated beyond five feet bgs, shall comply with
the following requirements prior to the
commencement of any construction activities:

The Developer shall retain a qualified
professional paleontologist to review project
plans to determine if underlying
paleontologically sensitive units (i.e., early
Holocene to Pleistocene age deposits [Qoa])
Verification that project
applicant has retained a
qualified paleontologist to
review plans and determine
underlying sensitivity for
projects requiring ground
disturbance beyond five
feet below surface in Qyf
and Qf areas.

If potential impacts are
identified, review and
approval of a PRMP that
includes WEAP training.

Prior to the start of
construction activities
Once City of Burbank
Community
Development
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-435
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-11
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
GEO-1(a) Paleontological Resources Management (cont’d)
could be impacted. If potentially significant
impacts are identified, the qualified
professional paleontologist shall prepare and
implement a Paleontological Resources
Mitigation Plan (PRMP). The PRMP shall
describe mitigation recommendations,
including paleontological monitoring
procedures; communication protocols to be
followed in the event that an unanticipated
fossil discovery is made during project
development; and preparation, curation, and
reporting requirements.

As part of a PRMP, require the Qualified
Paleontologist or his or her designee to
conduct Worker Environmental Awareness
Program (WEAP) training for the general
contractor, subcontractor(s), and all
construction workers participating in earth
disturbing activities, regarding the appearance
of fossils and the procedures for notifying
paleontological staff should fossils be
discovered by on-site personnel. The WEAP
shall be fulfilled at the time of a
preconstruction meeting. A training
acknowledgment form must be signed by all
workers who receive the training and retained
by the City. In the event a fossil is discovered
by construction personnel, all work in the
immediate vicinity of the find shall cease and
the qualified paleontologist shall be contacted
to evaluate the find before re-starting work in
the area. If it is determined that the fossil(s) is
(are) scientifically significant, the qualified
paleontologist shall complete the mitigation
outlined below (GEO-1[b]) to mitigate impacts
to significant fossil resources.

Review and retention of
WEAP training
acknowledgement form
signed by all trainees.

Prior to the start of
construction activities
and during ground-
disturbing activities,
as needed
Continuous;
throughout
ground-
disturbing
activities
Same as above
Verification that the project
applicant has retained a
qualified paleontologist to
conduct monitoring during
ground-disturbing activities
Prior to the start of
construction activities
Once Same as above
If a fossil is discovered, field
verification that all work in
the immediate vicinity of
the find is ceased and
qualified paleontologist
evaluates the find.

Upon discovery of
fossil(s)
Continuous;
throughout
ground-
disturbing
activities
Same as above
If qualified paleontologist
confirms full-time
monitoring is not
warranted, review and
approval of
recommendation that
monitoring be limited.

During initial ground
disturbance
Once Same as above

ATTACHMENT 12-436
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-12
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
GEO-1(a) Paleontological Resources Management (cont’d)
Conduct monitoring during ground construction
activities (i.e., grading, trenching, foundation
work, and other excavations). Monitoring shall
be conducted by a qualified paleontological
monitor, who is defined as an individual who
meets the minimum qualifications per standards
set forth by the SVP (2010), which includes a
B.S. or B.A. degree in geology or paleontology
with one year of monitoring experience and
knowledge of collection and salvage of
paleontological resources. The duration and
timing of the monitoring shall be determined by
the Qualified Paleontologist and the location
and extent of proposed ground disturbance. If
the Qualified Paleontologist determines that
full-time monitoring is no longer warranted,
based on the specific geologic conditions at the
surface or at depth, the Qualified Paleontologist
may recommend that monitoring be limited to
periodic spot-checking or cease entirely.

GEO-1(b) Fossil Discovery, Preparation and Curation
If a paleontological resource is discovered at any
time during earthmoving activities, the
construction contractor shall ensure that all
construction activities in the immediate area of the
find are halted and diverted, and the City is
contacted. A qualified paleontologist shall be
retained (if not done so already) to evaluate the
discovery. The paleontologist shall have the
authority to temporarily direct, divert or halt
construction activity around the find until it is
assessed for scientific significance and collected to
ensure that the fossil(s) can be removed in a safe
and timely manner.

Once salvaged, significant fossils shall be identified
to the lowest possible taxonomic level, prepared to
If a paleontological
resource is discovered, field
verification that all work in
the immediate vicinity of
the find is ceased and/or
diverted and qualified
paleontologist evaluates
the find.

Upon discovery of
paleontological
resource
Continuous;
throughout
ground-
disturbing
activities
City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

Coordination with qualified
paleontologist to assess,
collect, and remove
resource.

Upon discovery of
paleontological
resource
Continuous;
until
coordination is
complete
Same as above
ATTACHMENT 12-437
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-13
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
GEO-1(b) Fossil Discovery, Preparation and Curation (cont’d) a curation-ready condition and curated in a
scientific institution with a permanent
paleontological collection (such as the Natural
History Museum of Los Angeles County [NHMLAC])
along with all pertinent field notes, photos, data,
and maps.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-2 Property Assessment – Phase I and II ESAs
Prior to the start of construction (demolition or
grading), the project applicant will retain a
qualified environmental professional (EP), as
defined by ASTM E-1527, to complete one of the
following:

If the project is not listed in Appendix F, DTSC
(GeoTracker) or SWRCB (EnviroStor) resources,
then the proponent will retain a qualified
environmental consultant, California Professional
Geologist (PG) or California Professional Engineer
(PE), to prepare a Phase I ESA. If the Phase I ESA
identifies recognized environmental conditions or
potential concern areas, a Phase II ESA will be
prepared.

If the project is listed in Appendix F, DTSC
(GeoTracker) or SWRCB (EnviroStor) resources,
then the project proponent will retain a qualified
environmental consultant, California Professional
Geologist (PG) or California Professional Engineer
(PE), to prepare a Phase II ESA to determine
whether the soil, groundwater, and/or soil vapor
has been impacted at concentrations exceeding
regulatory screening levels for commercial/
industrial land uses. Any and all recommended
actions included in the Phase II ESA will be
followed. This may include the preparation of a Soil
Management Plan (SMP) for Impacted Soils (see
Verification that the project
applicant has retained a
qualified EP for submittal of
either a Phase I ESA or
Phase II ESA.

Review and approval of the
Phase I ESA or Phase II ESA.

Review and approval of the
SMP, if recommended in
the Phase II ESA.

If soils contain chemical
concentrations exceeding
hazardous waste screening
thresholds, review and
approve recommendations
for waste disposal,
impacted wastes, and
remedial engineering
controls.

Prior to the start of
construction activities
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-438
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-14
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
HAZ-2 Property Assessment – Phase I and II ESAs (cont’d) below) prior to project construction and/or
completion of remediation at the proposed project
prior to onsite construction.

The completed ESAs will be submitted to the lead
agency for review and approval prior to issuance of
building or grading permits.

Soil Management Plan Requirements: The SMP, or
equivalent document, will be prepared to address
on-site handling and management of impacted soils
or other impacted wastes, and reduce hazards to
construction workers and offsite receptors during
construction. The plan will be submitted to the lead
agency, and must establish remedial measures
and/or soil management practices to ensure
construction worker safety, the health of future
workers and visitors, and the off-site migration of
contaminants from the site. These measures and
practices may include, but are not limited to:
 Stockpile management including stormwater
pollution prevention and the installation of
BMPs
 Proper disposal procedures of contaminated
materials
 Monitoring and reporting
 A health and safety plan for contractors working
at the site that addresses the safety and health
hazards of each phase of site construction
activities with the requirements and procedures
for employee protection
 The health and safety plan will also outline
proper soil handling procedures and health and
safety requirements to minimize worker and
public exposure to hazardous materials during
construction.

The lead agency will review and approve the
development site Soil Management Plan for

ATTACHMENT 12-439
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-15
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
HAZ-2 Property Assessment – Phase I and II ESAs (cont’d) Impacted Soils prior to demolition and grading
(construction).

Soil Remediation Requirements: If soil present
within the construction envelope at the
development site contains chemicals at
concentrations exceeding hazardous waste
screening thresholds for contaminants in soil
(California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 22,
Section 66261.24), the project proponent will retain
a qualified environmental consultant (PG or PE), to
conduct additional analytical testing and
recommend soil disposal recommendations, or
consider other remedial engineering controls, as
necessary.

The qualified environmental consultant will utilize
the development site analytical results for waste
characterization purposes prior to offsite
transportation or disposal of potentially impacted
soils or other impacted wastes. The qualified
environmental consultant will provide disposal
recommendations and arrange for proper disposal
of the waste soils or other impacted wastes (as
necessary), and/or provide recommendations for
remedial engineering controls, if appropriate.

The project applicant will review and approve the
disposal recommendations prior to transportation
of waste soils offsite, and review and approve
remedial engineering controls, prior to
construction.

Remediation of impacted soils and/or
implementation of remedial engineering controls,
may require additional delineation of impacts;
additional analytical testing per landfill or recycling facility requirements; soil excavation; and offsite
disposal or recycling.

ATTACHMENT 12-440
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-16
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
HAZ-2 Property Assessment – Phase I and II ESAs (cont’d) The lead agency will review and approve the
development site disposal recommendations prior
to transportation of waste soils offsite and review
and approve remedial engineering controls, prior to
construction.

Noise
NOI-1(a) Shielding and Silencing
Power construction equipment (including
combustion engines), fixed or mobile, shall be
equipped with noise shielding and silencing devices
consistent with manufacturer’s standards or the
Best Available Control Technology. Equipment shall
be properly maintained, and the project applicant
or owner shall require any construction contractor
to keep documentation on-site during any
earthwork or construction activities demonstrating
that the equipment has been maintained in
accordance with manufacturer’s specifications.

Review and verification
that construction plans
note all equipment to be
used.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

Review and verification of
documentation
demonstrating power
construction equipment is
equipped with noise
shielding and silencing
devices and is maintained
in accordance with
manufacturer
specifications.

Prior to start of
construction activities
and during
construction
Continuous;
throughout
construction
Same as above
NOI-1(b) Enclosures and Screening
All outdoor fixed mechanical equipment shall be
enclosed or screened from off-site noise-sensitive
uses. The equipment enclosure or screen shall be
impermeable (i.e., solid material with minimum
weight of 2 pounds per square feet) and break the
line-of-sight from the equipment and off-site
noise-sensitive uses
Review and verification
that construction plans
note enclosure/screening
requirements for all mixed
mechanical equipment.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

Field verification that fixed
equipment is enclosed.

During construction
activities
Continuous;
throughout
construction
Same as above
ATTACHMENT 12-441
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-17
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
NOI-1(c) Construction Staging Areas
Construction staging areas shall be located as far
from noise-sensitive uses as reasonably possible
and feasible in consideration of site boundaries,
topography, intervening roads and uses, and
operational constraints.

Review and verification
that construction plans
note locations of staging
areas.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

Field verification that
staging areas are located
consistent with plans.

During construction
activities
Continuous;
throughout
construction
Same as above
NOI-1(d) Smart Back-Up Alarms
Mobile construction equipment shall have smart
back-up alarms that automatically adjust the sound
level of the alarm in response to ambient noise
levels. Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be
disabled and replaced with human spotters to
ensure safety when mobile construction
equipment is moving in the reverse direction.

Review and verification
that construction plans
note the use of back-up
alarms on mobile
construction equipment.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

Field verification that smart
back-up alarms are utilized.

During construction
activities
Continuous;
throughout
construction
Same as above
NOI-1(e) Equipment Idling
Construction vehicles and equipment shall not be
left idling for longer than five minutes when not in
use.

Review and verification
that construction plans
note idling requirements.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

Field verification that
construction vehicles are
not left idling.

During construction
activities
Continuous;
throughout
construction
Same as above
ATTACHMENT 12-442
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-18
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
NOI-1(f) Workers’ Radios
All noise from workers’ radios, including any on-
site music, shall be controlled to a point that they
are not audible at off-site noise-sensitive uses.

Review and verification
that construction plans
note worker radio
requirements.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

Field verification that
radios are not audible off-
site.

During construction
activities
Continuous;
throughout
construction
Same as above
NOI-1(g) Use of Driven Pile Systems
Driven (impact), sonic, or vibratory pile drivers
shall not be used, except in locations where the
underlying geology renders alternative methods
infeasible, as determined by a soils or geotechnical
engineer and documented in a soils report.

Review and verification
that construction plans
note requirement and
necessary assurances have
been obtained.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

Field verification that
driven, sonic, or vibratory
pile drivers are avoided,
unless geotechnically
required.

During construction
activities
Continuous;
throughout
construction
Same as above
NOI-1(h) Temporary Sound Barriers
Temporary sound barriers, such as walls or sound
blankets, shall be positioned between construction
activities and noise-sensitive uses when
construction equipment are located within a line-
of-sight to and within 500 feet of off-site noise-
sensitive uses. Sound barriers shall break the line-
of-sight between the construction noise source
and the receiver where modeled levels exceed
applicable standards. Placement, orientation, size,
and density of acoustical barriers shall be specified
by a qualified acoustical consultant.

Review and verification
that construction plans
note locations of
temporary sound barriers
as specified by a qualified
acoustical consultant.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

Field verification that
sound barriers are
implemented and
positioned accordingly.

During construction
activities
Continuous;
throughout
construction
Same as above
ATTACHMENT 12-443
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-19
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
NOI-1(i) Noise Complaint Response
Project applicants shall designate an on-site
construction project manager who shall be
responsible for responding to any complaints
about construction noise. This person shall be
responsible for responding to concerns of
neighboring properties about construction noise
disturbance and shall be available for responding
to any construction noise complaints during the
hours that construction is to take place. They shall
also responsible for determining the cause of the
noise complaint (e.g., bad silencer) and shall
require that reasonable measures be implemented
to correct the problem. A toll-free telephone
number and email address shall be posted in a
highly visible manner on the construction site at all
times and provided in all notices (mailed, online
website, and construction site postings) for
receiving questions or complaints during
construction and shall also include procedures
requiring that the on-site construction manager to
respond to callers and email messages. The on-site
construction project manager shall be required to
track complaints pertaining to construction noise,
ongoing throughout demolition, grading, and/or
construction and shall notify the City’s Community
Development Director of each complaint
occurrence.

Review and verification
that an on-site construction
project manager has been
identified to implement the
mitigation requirement.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

Field verification that
signage is posted on the
construction site with a
toll-free telephone number
and email address that can
be called to receive
questions or complaints.

Coordination with the
construction manager to
verify that complaints are
submitted to the City’s
Community Development
Director and confirm that
an appropriate response is
carried out to address the
complaints.

During construction
activities
Continuous;
throughout
construction
Same as above
NOI-1(j) Project-Specific Construction Noise Study
A Construction Noise Study, prepared by a
qualified noise expert to meet the requirements
herein, shall be required for housing development
projects located within 500 feet of noise-sensitive
land uses identified in the Burbank2035 General
Plan Noise Element (i.e., residences, parks, motels,
hotels, movies studios, school, and hospitals), and
Verification that the
applicant has retained a
qualified noise analyst to
evaluate project-specific
construction noise in a
Construction Noise Study
for projects located within
500 feet of a noise-
Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-444
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-20
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
that have one or more of the following
characteristics:
 Two subterranean levels or more (generally
more than 20,000 cubic yards of excavated soil
material;
 Construction durations of 18 months or more
(excluding interior finishing);
 Use of large, heavy-duty equipment rated 300
horsepower or greater;
 The potential for pile driving; or
 Located within 1,000 feet of other construction
projects with overlapping construction
schedules.

The Construction Noise Study shall characterize
sources of construction noise, quantify noise levels
at noise-sensitive uses (e.g., residences, parks,
motels, hotels, movies studios, school, and
hospitals) and identify measures to reduce noise
exposure. The Construction Noise Study shall
identify reasonably available noise reduction
devices or techniques to reduce noise levels to
acceptable levels and/or durations including
through reliance on any relevant federal, state or
local standards or guidelines or accepted industry
practices. Noise reduction devices or techniques
may include but not be limited to silencers,
enclosures, sound barriers, and/or placement of
restrictions on equipment or construction
sensitive use and that
exceed the one or more of
the screening criteria.

Review and approval of the
Air Quality Impact Analysis.

Review and verification
that contractor agreements
note requirements under
Mitigation Measures
NOI-1a through NOI-1f in
addition to additional
requirements identified
and recommended by the
Construction Noise Study.

NOI-1(j) Project-Specific Construction Noise Study (cont’d) techniques (e.g., alternative installation methods to
pile driving such as cast-in-place systems or pile
cushioning). Each measure in the Construction
Noise Study shall identify anticipated noise
reductions at noise-sensitive land uses.

Project applicants shall be required to comply with
all requirements of Mitigation Measures NOI-1a
through NOI-1f in addition to any additional

ATTACHMENT 12-445
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-21
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
requirements identified and recommended by the
Construction Noise Study and shall maintain proof
that notice of, as well as compliance with, the
identified measures have been included in
contractor agreements.

NOI-3 Vibration Control Plan
For construction activities involving vibratory
rollers within 50 feet of a structure or pile drivers
(impact or sonic) within 140 feet of a structure, the
applicant shall prepare a Vibration Control Plan
prior to the commencement of construction
activities. The Vibration Control Plan shall be
prepared by a licensed structural engineer and
shall include methods required to minimize
vibration, including, but not limited to:
 Alternative installation methods for pile driving
(e.g., pile cushioning, drilled piles, cast-in-place
systems) within 140 feet of a building to reduce
impacts associated with seating the pile
 Vibration monitoring prior to and during pile
driving operations occurring within 140 feet of
a building
 Use of rubber-tired equipment rather than
metal-tracked equipment
 Avoiding the use of vibrating equipment when
allowed by best engineering practices
Review and verification
that the applicant has
retained a licensed
structural engineer to
prepare a Vibration Control
Plan for projects involving a
vibratory roller within
50 feet of a structure or a
pile driver within 140 feet
of a structure.

Review and approval of
Vibration Control Plan.

Verification of submittal of
Statement of Compliance
from the project and
applicant and owner to the
Building and Safety
Division.

Coordination and approval
from the Building and
Safety Division.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

NOI-3 Vibration Control Plan (cont’d)
The Vibration Control Plan shall include a pre-
construction survey letter establishing baseline
conditions at potentially affected extremely fragile
buildings/historical resources and/or residential
structures. The survey letter shall determine
conditions that exist prior to the commencement of
Review and approval of
follow-up letter describing
damage and, if applicable,
recommendations for
repair from licensed
structural engineer.

Upon completion of
vibration-causing
construction activities
Once Same as above
ATTACHMENT 12-446
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-22
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
construction activities for use in evaluating
potential damages caused by construction. Fixtures
and finishes susceptible to damage shall be
documented photographically and in writing prior
to construction. The survey letter shall provide a
shoring design to protect such buildings and
structures from potential damage. At the conclusion
of vibration causing activities, the qualified
structural engineer shall issue a follow-up letter
describing damage, if any, to impacted buildings
and structures. The letter shall include
recommendations for any repair, as may be
necessary, in conformance with the Secretary of the
Interior Standards. Repairs shall be undertaken and
completed by the contractor and monitored by a
qualified structural engineer in conformance with
all applicable codes including the California
Historical Building Code (Part 8 of Title 24).

A Statement of Compliance signed by the applicant
and owner shall be submitted to the City’ Building
and Safety Division at plan check and prior to the
issuance of any permit. The Vibration Control Plan,
prepared as outlined above shall be documented by
a qualified structural engineer, and shall be
provided to the City upon request.

Field verification of
structural repairs to
damaged buildings.

Upon completion of
vibration-causing
construction activities
Continuous;
throughout repair
work
Same as above
NOI-C1 Construction Building Permits
The City’s Community Development Department
shall review the locations and anticipated
construction timing for housing development
projects with respect to the locations of other
pending development projects. The City shall
stagger the issuance of building permits for
development projects with overlapping
construction schedules that meet both of the
following criteria:
 The development project is located within
1,000 feet of another separate development
project; and
Review of location and
construction timing of
housing projects.

Staggering of building
permits for development
projects with overlapping
schedules that meet the
criteria.

Review and approval of
site-specific noise and
vibration studies.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Continuous;
throughout
citywide
development
City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-447
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-23
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
 The development project is located 500 feet or
less from a sensitive receiver.

In these instances, the Community Development
Department shall review the findings of any site-
specific noise and vibration studies pertaining to
future development projects to compare their
locations to sensitive receivers identified therein.

Utilities/Service Systems
UTIL-1 Sewer Service Constraints Analysis
The City will conduct an analysis to identify any
sewer service constraints to determine if there are
any sewer capacity issues and any constraints in
the City’s wastewater system including assessment
of system capacity relative to the locations of
opportunity sites identified in the Housing Element
Update. The analysis will identify upgrades
necessary to mitigate the constraints in the system
to ensure that individual housing development
projects implemented under the Housing Element
can be completed and that sufficient capacity and
conveyance in the wastewater system exists.

However, if a proposed development has a
construction schedule that the City cannot
accommodate, the developer may be responsible
for performing the necessary sewer infrastructure
upgrades per Burbank Municipal Code (BMC) 8-1-
304.

Based on the constraints identified in the analysis,
the City’s Public Works Department will prepare a
nexus fee study to develop a fair share
requirement in the form of a wastewater
connection or similar project impact fee, which
helps to pay for implementation of upgrades
necessary to accommodate future development,
including development of the opportunity sites
where deficiencies in the system are identified to
exist. Through the fee study, subsequent cost
Conduct a sewer service
constraints analysis relative
to opportunity sites.

Preparation of a nexus fee
study to develop a fair
share requirement in the
form of a wastewater
connection or similar
project impact fee.

Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department

Application of subsequent
cost recovery fees to
projects.

If service upgrades cannot
be completed by City for a
project, require that the
project developer perform
the necessary sewer
infrastructure upgrades
(per BMC 8-1-304) or enter
into a reimbursement
agreement.

If the City and project
developer mutually agree
to enter into
reimbursement agreement,
coordination with Public
Prior to issuance of a
construction permit
Continuous;
throughout
citywide
development
City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department;
City of
Burbank
Public Works
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-448
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-24
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
recovery fees applied to individual housing
development projects will be based on a rough
proportionality related to demands on the system
reasonably attributed to the development project.

Works Department Director
to administer agreement.

UTIL-1 Sewer Service Constraints Analysis (cont’d)
In the event it is determined that necessary
upgrades to serve a project cannot be completed
by the City prior to project completion, the City
may require the developer to perform the
necessary sewer infrastructure upgrades (Per BMC
8-1-304) at cost to the developer, or the City can
choose to enter into a reimbursement agreement
so that a developer shall fund and construct the
improvements within the necessary timeframe
with subsequent partial reimbursement. If the City
and Developer mutually agree to enter into
reimbursement agreement (approved as to form
by the City Attorney and approved by the City
Council), it would be administered by the City’s
Public Works Director on behalf of the City.

UTIL-3a Sewer System Upgrades by Developers
A Sewer Capacity Analysis (SCA) shall be required
for individual housing projects of five (5) or more
multi-family units, so the City may identify sewer
infrastructure upgrades that can be implemented
by developers when a nexus and rough
proportionality is established between proposed
project(s) impact to City sewer infrastructure. The
SCA must be completed as part of the City’s
development review process or prior to the
submittal of plan check documents, whichever
occurs first.

Review and approve the
SCA for projects that meet
the criteria.

If upgrades are necessary,
verify that the appropriate
fee is received based on a
nexus fee study.

SCA to be completed
as part of the City’s
development review
process or prior to the
submittal of plan
check documents,
whichever occurs first.

Fees must be received
prior to issuance of a
construction permit.

Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department;
City of
Burbank
Public Works
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-449
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Final Environmental Impact Report 5-25
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
UTIL-3b Sewage Diversion
Per the City’s Public Works Department there are
several locations throughout the City of Burbank
where sewage can potentially be diverted away
from the BWRP and conveyed to the City of Los
Angeles’ Hyperion wastewater treatment system.

As a short-term measure, diversion of sewage may
potentially be used to alleviate capacity concerns
for certain sewage conveyance pipelines (but not
all pipelines) as well as temporarily lowering the
influent flows to the BWRP. Diverting flows to the
Los Angeles system would result in an increase in
one-time Sewer Facility Charges (SFCs) and other
recurring annual charges (capital improvement and
operation & maintenance fees) that shall be paid
to the City of Los Angeles. Therefore, if the sewage
analysis determines that diversion is feasible, the
applicant will be required to contribute a fair share
fee, which shall be estimated based on the
preliminary billing estimates received from the City
of Los Angeles, to offset to the cost of diversion to
the City of Los Angeles.

If the sewage analysis
determines that diversion is
feasible, the applicant will
be required to contribute a
fair share fee, which shall
be estimated based on the
preliminary billing
estimates received from
the City of Los Angeles, to
offset to the cost of
diversion to the City of Los
Angeles.

To be completed as
part of the City’s
development review
process or prior to the
submittal of plan
check documents,
whichever occurs first.

Fees must be received
prior to issuance of a
construction permit.

Ongoing
throughout the
period of
sewage
diversion
City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department;
City of
Burbank
Public Works
Department

UTIL-3c Sewer System Master Plan
The City shall prepare a new Sewer System Master
Plan in 2023 to evaluate the City’s sewer
conveyance and treatment system over the next
twenty years, which is inclusive of the proposed
Housing Element update planning and
implementation period, as well as developing the
appropriate sewer facility impact fees to ensure
that developers pay their fair share of the cost to
expand and upgrade the capacity of the BWRP
treatment facilities.

Prepare a Sewer System
Master Plan that includes
requirements for
appropriate sewer facility
impact fees.

To be approved in
2023
Once City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department;
City of
Burbank
Public Works
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-450
City of Burbank
Burbank Housing and Safety Element Update

5-26
Mitigation Measure/Condition of Approval Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring
Frequency
Responsible
Agency
Compliance Verification
Initial Date Comments
UTIL-3d Expansion and Upgrades to BWRP Treatment Facilities The City shall expand and upgrade the BWRP
treatment facilities as needed consistent with the
City’s Sewer System Master Plan including but not
limited to, the acquisition of land adjacent to the
BWRP facilities, the addition of new primary
clarifiers, increased capacity in the equalization
basins, and upgrades to other parts of the sewage
treatment process.

Conduct a sewer service
constraints analysis relative
to opportunity sites.

Preparation of a nexus fee
study to develop a fair
share requirement in the
form of a wastewater
connection or similar
project impact fee.

After approval of
Sewer System Master
Plan
Continuous;
throughout
citywide
development
City of
Burbank
Community
Development
Department;
City of
Burbank
Public Works
Department

ATTACHMENT 12-451
Appendix H
Exhibits to Letter O-1 – Mitchell M. Tsai
ATTACHMENT 12-452

EXHIBIT A
ATTACHMENT 12-453

1 2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
[email protected]
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
[email protected]
March 8, 2021

Mitchell M. Tsai
155 South El Molino, Suite 104
Pasadena, CA 91101

Subject: Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling Dear Mr. Tsai,
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (“SWAPE”) is pleased to provide the following draft technical report explaining the significance of worker trips required for construction of land use development projects with respect to the estimation of greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions. The report will also discuss the potential for local hire requirements to reduce the length of worker trips, and consequently, reduced or mitigate the potential GHG impacts.

Worker Trips and Greenhouse Gas Calculations
The California Emissions Estimator Model (“CalEEMod”) is a “statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects.”1 CalEEMod quantifies construction-related emissions associated with land use projects resulting from off-road construction equipment; on-road mobile equipment associated with workers, vendors, and hauling; fugitive dust associated with grading, demolition, truck loading, and on-road vehicles traveling along paved and unpaved roads; and architectural coating activities; and paving.2
The number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to calculate emissions associated with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the Project site during construction.3

1 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home. 2 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home. 3 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01_user-39-s-guide2016-3-2_15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34.

ATTACHMENT 12-454

2 Specifically, the number and length of vehicle trips is utilized to estimate the vehicle miles travelled (“VMT”) associated with construction. Then, utilizing vehicle-class specific EMFAC 2014 emission factors, CalEEMod calculates the vehicle exhaust, evaporative, and dust emissions resulting from construction-related VMT, including personal vehicles for worker commuting.4
Specifically, in order to calculate VMT, CalEEMod multiplies the average daily trip rate by the average overall trip length (see excerpt below):
“VMTd = Σ(Average Daily Trip Rate i * Average Overall Trip Length i) n Where:
n = Number of land uses being modeled.”5
Furthermore, to calculate the on-road emissions associated with worker trips, CalEEMod utilizes the following equation (see excerpt below):
“Emissionspollutant = VMT * EFrunning,pollutant
Where:

Emissionspollutant = emissions from vehicle running for each pollutant VMT = vehicle miles traveled
EFrunning,pollutant = emission factor for running emissions.”6 Thus, there is a direct relationship between trip length and VMT, as well as a direct relationship between VMT and vehicle running emissions. In other words, when the trip length is increased, the VMT and vehicle running emissions increase as a result. Thus, vehicle running emissions can be reduced by decreasing the average overall trip length, by way of a local hire requirement or otherwise.

Default Worker Trip Parameters and Potential Local Hire Requirements As previously discussed, the number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to calculate emissions associated with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the Project site during construction.7 In order to understand how local hire requirements and associated worker trip length reductions impact GHG emissions calculations, it is important to consider the CalEEMod default worker trip parameters. CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site-specific information, such as land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project type. If more specific project information is known, the user can change the default values and input project- specific values, but the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requires that such changes be justified by substantial evidence.8 The default number of construction-related worker trips is calculated by multiplying the

4 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 14-15. 5 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 23. 6 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 15. 7 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01_user-39-s-guide2016-3-2_15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34. 8 CalEEMod User Guide, available at: http://www.caleemod.com/, p. 1, 9.

ATTACHMENT 12-455

3 number of pieces of equipment for all phases by 1.25, with the exception of worker trips required for the building construction and architectural coating phases.9 Furthermore, the worker trip vehicle class is a 50/25/25 percent mix of light duty autos, light duty truck class 1 and light duty truck class 2, respectively.”10 Finally, the default worker trip length is consistent with the length of the operational home-to-work vehicle trips.11 The operational home-to-work vehicle trip lengths are:
“[B]ased on the location and urbanization selected on the project characteristic screen. These values were supplied by the air districts or use a default average for the state. Each district (or county) also assigns trip lengths for urban and rural settings” (emphasis added). 12 Thus, the default worker trip length is based on the location and urbanization level selected by the User when modeling emissions. The below table shows the CalEEMod default rural and urban worker trip lengths by air basin (see excerpt below and Attachment A).13
Worker Trip Length by Air Basin
Air Basin Rural (miles) Urban (miles)
Great Basin Valleys 16.8 10.8
Lake County 16.8 10.8
Lake Tahoe 16.8 10.8
Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Mountain Counties 16.8 10.8
North Central Coast 17.1 12.3
North Coast 16.8 10.8
Northeast Plateau 16.8 10.8
Sacramento Valley 16.8 10.8
Salton Sea 14.6 11
San Diego 16.8 10.8
San Francisco Bay Area 10.8 10.8
San Joaquin Valley 16.8 10.8
South Central Coast 16.8 10.8
South Coast 19.8 14.7
Average 16.47 11.17
Minimum 10.80 10.80
Maximum 19.80 14.70
Range 9.00 3.90

9 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01_user-39-s-guide2016-3-2_15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34. 10 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 15. 11 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 14. 12 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 21. 13 “Appendix D Default Data Tables.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/05_appendix-d2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. D-84 – D-86.

ATTACHMENT 12-456

4 As demonstrated above, default rural worker trip lengths for air basins in California vary from 10.8- to 19.8- miles, with an average of 16.47 miles. Furthermore, default urban worker trip lengths vary from 10.8- to 14.7- miles, with an average of 11.17 miles. Thus, while default worker trip lengths vary by location, default urban worker trip lengths tend to be shorter in length. Based on these trends evident in the CalEEMod default worker trip lengths, we can reasonably assume that the efficacy of a local hire requirement is especially dependent upon the urbanization of the project site, as well as the project location.

Practical Application of a Local Hire Requirement and Associated Impact To provide an example of the potential impact of a local hire provision on construction-related GHG emissions, we estimated the significance of a local hire provision for the Village South Specific Plan (“Project”) located in the City of Claremont (“City”). The Project proposed to construct 1,000 residential units, 100,000-SF of retail space, 45,000-SF of office space, as well as a 50-room hotel, on the 24-acre site. The Project location is classified as Urban and lies within the Los Angeles-South Coast County. As a result, the Project has a default worker trip length of 14.7 miles.14 In an effort to evaluate the potential for a local hire provision to reduce the Project’s construction-related GHG emissions, we prepared an updated model, reducing all worker trip lengths to 10 miles (see Attachment B). Our analysis estimates that if a local hire provision with a 10-mile radius were to be implemented, the GHG emissions associated with Project construction would decrease by approximately 17% (see table below and Attachment C).

Local Hire Provision Net Change
Without Local Hire Provision
Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) 3,623
Amortized Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e/year) 120.77 With Local Hire Provision
Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) 3,024
Amortized Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e/year) 100.80 % Decrease in Construction-related GHG Emissions 17%
As demonstrated above, by implementing a local hire provision requiring 10 mile worker trip lengths, the Project could reduce potential GHG emissions associated with construction worker trips. More broadly, any local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of construction-related GHG emissions, though the significance of the reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the project site.

This serves as an example of the potential impacts of local hire requirements on estimated project-level GHG emissions, though it does not indicate that local hire requirements would result in reduced construction-related GHG emission for all projects. As previously described, the significance of a local hire requirement depends on the worker trip length enforced and the default worker trip length for the project’s urbanization level and location.

14 “Appendix D Default Data Tables.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/05_appendix-d2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. D-85.

ATTACHMENT 12-457

5 Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of information obtained or provided by third parties.

Sincerely,

Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

ATTACHMENT 12-458
Location Type Location Name Rural H-W
(miles)
Urban H-W
(miles)
Air Basin Great Basin 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Lake County 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Lake Tahoe 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Mountain 16.8 10.8
Air Basin North Central 17.1 12.3
Air Basin North Coast 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Northeast 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Sacramento 16.8 10.8
Air Basin Salton Sea 14.6 11
Air Basin San Diego 16.8 10.8
Air Basin San Francisco

10.8 10.8
Air Basin San Joaquin 16.8 10.8
Air Basin South Central 16.8 10.8
Air Basin South Coast 19.8 14.7
Air District Amador County 16.8 10.8
Air District Antelope Valley 16.8 10.8
Air District Bay Area AQMD 10.8 10.8
Air District Butte County 12.54 12.54
Air District Calaveras

16.8 10.8
Air District Colusa County 16.8 10.8
Air District El Dorado

16.8 10.8
Air District Feather River 16.8 10.8
Air District Glenn County 16.8 10.8
Air District Great Basin 16.8 10.8
Air District Imperial County 10.2 7.3
Air District Kern County 16.8 10.8
Air District Lake County 16.8 10.8
Air District Lassen County 16.8 10.8
Air District Mariposa

16.8 10.8
Air District Mendocino

16.8 10.8
Air District Modoc County 16.8 10.8
Air District Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Air District Monterey Bay

16.8 10.8
Air District North Coast

16.8 10.8
Air District Northern Sierra 16.8 10.8
Air District Northern

16.8 10.8
Air District Placer County 16.8 10.8
Air District Sacramento 15 10
Attachment A
ATTACHMENT 12-459
Air District San Diego

16.8 10.8
Air District San Joaquin

16.8 10.8
Air District San Luis Obispo

13 13
Air District Santa Barbara

8.3 8.3
Air District Shasta County 16.8 10.8
Air District Siskiyou County

16.8 10.8
Air District South Coast 19.8 14.7
Air District Tehama County 16.8 10.8
Air District Tuolumne 16.8 10.8
Air District Ventura County 16.8 10.8
Air District Yolo/Solano 15 10
County Alameda 10.8 10.8
County Alpine 16.8 10.8
County Amador 16.8 10.8
County Butte 12.54 12.54
County Calaveras 16.8 10.8
County Colusa 16.8 10.8
County Contra Costa 10.8 10.8
County Del Norte 16.8 10.8
County El Dorado-Lake 16.8 10.8
County El Dorado- 16.8 10.8
County Fresno 16.8 10.8
County Glenn 16.8 10.8
County Humboldt 16.8 10.8
County Imperial 10.2 7.3
County Inyo 16.8 10.8
County Kern-Mojave 16.8 10.8
County Kern-San 16.8 10.8
County Kings 16.8 10.8
County Lake 16.8 10.8
County Lassen 16.8 10.8
County Los Angeles- 16.8 10.8
County Los Angeles- 19.8 14.7
County Madera 16.8 10.8
County Marin 10.8 10.8
County Mariposa 16.8 10.8
County Mendocino- 16.8 10.8
County Mendocino- 16.8 10.8
County Mendocino- 16.8 10.8
County Mendocino- 16.8 10.8
County Merced 16.8 10.8
County Modoc 16.8 10.8
County Mono 16.8 10.8
County Monterey 16.8 10.8
County Napa 10.8 10.8
ATTACHMENT 12-460
County Nevada 16.8 10.8
County Orange 19.8 14.7
County Placer-Lake 16.8 10.8
County Placer-Mountain 16.8 10.8
County Placer- 16.8 10.8
County Plumas 16.8 10.8
County Riverside- 16.8 10.8
County Riverside-

19.8 14.7
County Riverside-Salton 14.6 11
County Riverside-South 19.8 14.7
County Sacramento 15 10
County San Benito 16.8 10.8
County San Bernardino-

16.8 10.8
County San Bernardino-

19.8 14.7
County San Diego 16.8 10.8
County San Francisco 10.8 10.8
County San Joaquin 16.8 10.8
County San Luis Obispo 13 13
County San Mateo 10.8 10.8
County Santa Barbara-

8.3 8.3
County Santa Barbara-

8.3 8.3
County Santa Clara 10.8 10.8
County Santa Cruz 16.8 10.8
County Shasta 16.8 10.8
County Sierra 16.8 10.8
County Siskiyou 16.8 10.8
County Solano- 15 10
County Solano-San 16.8 10.8
County Sonoma-North 16.8 10.8
County Sonoma-San 10.8 10.8
County Stanislaus 16.8 10.8
County Sutter 16.8 10.8
County Tehama 16.8 10.8
County Trinity 16.8 10.8
County Tulare 16.8 10.8
County Tuolumne 16.8 10.8
County Ventura 16.8 10.8
County Yolo 15 10
County Yuba 16.8 10.8
Statewide Statewide 16.8 10.8
ATTACHMENT 12-461
Air Basin Rural (miles) Urban (miles)
Great Basin Valleys 16.8 10.8
Lake County 16.8 10.8
Lake Tahoe 16.8 10.8
Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Mountain Counties 16.8 10.8
North Central Coast 17.1 12.3
North Coast 16.8 10.8
Northeast Plateau 16.8 10.8
Sacramento Valley 16.8 10.8
Salton Sea 14.6 11
San Diego 16.8 10.8
San Francisco Bay Area 10.8 10.8
San Joaquin Valley 16.8 10.8
South Central Coast 16.8 10.8
South Coast 19.8 14.7
Average 16.47 11.17
Mininum 10.80 10.80
Maximum 19.80 14.70
Range 9.00 3.90
Worker Trip Length by Air Basin
ATTACHMENT 12-462

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0 High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0 Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72 Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789 Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9 Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 1 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual Attachment B
ATTACHMENT 12-463
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.

Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.

Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.

Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.

Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.

Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.

Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.

Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 2 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-464

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 3 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-465

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2021 0.1713 1.8242 1.1662 2.4000e-
003

0.4169 0.0817 0.4986 0.1795 0.0754 0.2549 0.0000 213.1969 213.1969 0.0601 0.0000 214.6993 2022 0.6904 4.1142 6.1625 0.0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0.0000 1,721.682 6 1,721.682
6 0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
7 2023 0.6148 3.3649 5.6747 0.0178 1.1963 0.0996 1.2959 0.3203 0.0935 0.4138 0.0000 1,627.529 5 1,627.529
5 0.1185 0.0000 1,630.492
5 2024 4.1619 0.1335 0.2810 5.9000e-
004

0.0325 6.4700e-
003

0.0390 8.6300e-
003

6.0400e-
003

0.0147 0.0000 52.9078 52.9078 8.0200e-
003

0.0000 53.1082
Maximum 4.1619 4.1142 6.1625 0.0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0.0000 1,721.682 6 1,721.682
6 0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
7 Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 4 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-466

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2021 0.1713 1.8242 1.1662 2.4000e-
003

0.4169 0.0817 0.4986 0.1795 0.0754 0.2549 0.0000 213.1967 213.1967 0.0601 0.0000 214.6991 2022 0.6904 4.1142 6.1625 0.0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0.0000 1,721.682 3 1,721.682
3 0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
3 2023 0.6148 3.3648 5.6747 0.0178 1.1963 0.0996 1.2959 0.3203 0.0935 0.4138 0.0000 1,627.529 1 1,627.529
1 0.1185 0.0000 1,630.492
1 2024 4.1619 0.1335 0.2810 5.9000e-
004

0.0325 6.4700e-
003

0.0390 8.6300e-
003

6.0400e-
003

0.0147 0.0000 52.9077 52.9077 8.0200e-
003

0.0000 53.1082
Maximum 4.1619 4.1142 6.1625 0.0189 1.3058 0.1201 1.4259 0.3460 0.1128 0.4588 0.0000 1,721.682 3 1,721.682
3 0.1294 0.0000 1,724.918
3 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 9-1-2021 11-30-2021 1.4103 1.4103
2 12-1-2021 2-28-2022 1.3613 1.3613
3 3-1-2022 5-31-2022 1.1985 1.1985
4 6-1-2022 8-31-2022 1.1921 1.1921
5 9-1-2022 11-30-2022 1.1918 1.1918
6 12-1-2022 2-28-2023 1.0774 1.0774
7 3-1-2023 5-31-2023 1.0320 1.0320
8 6-1-2023 8-31-2023 1.0260 1.0260
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 5 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-467

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003

0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e- 003
222.5835
Energy 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003

0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 3,896.073
2 3,896.073
2 0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283
3 Mobile 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498 6 7,620.498
6 0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 0.0000 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 29.1632 556.6420 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567 Total 6.8692 9.5223 30.3407 0.0914 7.7979 0.2260 8.0240 2.0895 0.2219 2.3114 236.9712 12,294.18 07 12,531.15
19 15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47
51 Unmitigated Operational
9 9-1-2023 11-30-2023 1.0265 1.0265
10 12-1-2023 2-29-2024 2.8857 2.8857
11 3-1-2024 5-31-2024 1.6207 1.6207
Highest 2.8857 2.8857
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 6 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-468

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003

0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e- 003
222.5835
Energy 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003

0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 3,896.073
2 3,896.073
2 0.1303 0.0468 3,913.283
3 Mobile 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498 6 7,620.498
6 0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 207.8079 0.0000 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 29.1632 556.6420 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567 Total 6.8692 9.5223 30.3407 0.0914 7.7979 0.2260 8.0240 2.0895 0.2219 2.3114 236.9712 12,294.18 07 12,531.15
19 15.7904 0.1260 12,963.47
51 Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 7 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-469
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20 3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500 5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35 OffRoad Equipment
Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 8 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-470
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 9 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-471

3.2 Demolition - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 7.5100e-
003

0.0000 7.5100e-
003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004

0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601 Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004

0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e-
003

0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0012 51.0012 0.0144 0.0000 51.3601 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 10 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-472

3.2 Demolition - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.9300e-
003

0.0634 0.0148 1.8000e-
004

3.9400e-
003

1.9000e-
004

4.1300e-
003

1.0800e-
003

1.8000e-
004

1.2600e-
003

0.0000 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e-
003

0.0000 17.4869
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 9.7000e-
004

7.5000e-
004

8.5100e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.4700e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.4900e-
003

6.5000e-
004

2.0000e-
005

6.7000e-
004

0.0000 2.2251 2.2251 7.0000e-
005

0.0000 2.2267
Total 2.9000e-
003

0.0641 0.0233 2.0000e-
004

6.4100e-
003

2.1000e-
004

6.6200e-
003

1.7300e-
003

2.0000e-
004

1.9300e-
003

0.0000 19.6816 19.6816 1.2800e-
003

0.0000 19.7136
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 7.5100e-
003

0.0000 7.5100e-
003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004

0.0233 0.0233 0.0216 0.0216 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600 Total 0.0475 0.4716 0.3235 5.8000e-
004

0.0496 0.0233 0.0729 7.5100e-
003

0.0216 0.0291 0.0000 51.0011 51.0011 0.0144 0.0000 51.3600 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 11 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-473

3.2 Demolition - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.9300e-
003

0.0634 0.0148 1.8000e-
004

3.9400e-
003

1.9000e-
004

4.1300e-
003

1.0800e-
003

1.8000e-
004

1.2600e-
003

0.0000 17.4566 17.4566 1.2100e-
003

0.0000 17.4869
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 9.7000e-
004

7.5000e-
004

8.5100e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.4700e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.4900e-
003

6.5000e-
004

2.0000e-
005

6.7000e-
004

0.0000 2.2251 2.2251 7.0000e-
005

0.0000 2.2267
Total 2.9000e-
003

0.0641 0.0233 2.0000e-
004

6.4100e-
003

2.1000e-
004

6.6200e-
003

1.7300e-
003

2.0000e-
004

1.9300e-
003

0.0000 19.6816 19.6816 1.2800e-
003

0.0000 19.7136
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.1807 0.0000 0.1807 0.0993 0.0000 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004

0.0204 0.0204 0.0188 0.0188 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061 Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004

0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7061 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 12 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-474

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 7.7000e-
004

6.0000e-
004

6.8100e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.9700e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.9900e-
003

5.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

5.4000e-
004

0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005

0.0000 1.7814
Total 7.7000e-
004

6.0000e-
004

6.8100e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.9700e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.9900e-
003

5.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

5.4000e-
004

0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005

0.0000 1.7814
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.1807 0.0000 0.1807 0.0993 0.0000 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004

0.0204 0.0204 0.0188 0.0188 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060 Total 0.0389 0.4050 0.2115 3.8000e-
004

0.1807 0.0204 0.2011 0.0993 0.0188 0.1181 0.0000 33.4357 33.4357 0.0108 0.0000 33.7060 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 13 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-475

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 7.7000e-
004

6.0000e-
004

6.8100e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.9700e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.9900e-
003

5.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

5.4000e-
004

0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005

0.0000 1.7814
Total 7.7000e-
004

6.0000e-
004

6.8100e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.9700e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.9900e-
003

5.2000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

5.4000e-
004

0.0000 1.7801 1.7801 5.0000e-
005

0.0000 1.7814
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Grading - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 0.0693 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003

0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 103.5405 103.5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776 Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003

0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5405 103.5405 0.0335 0.0000 104.3776 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 14 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-476

3.4 Grading - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.6400e-
003

1.2700e-
003

0.0144 4.0000e-
005

4.1600e-
003

3.0000e-
005

4.2000e-
003

1.1100e-
003

3.0000e-
005

1.1400e-
003

0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004

0.0000 3.7607
Total 1.6400e-
003

1.2700e-
003

0.0144 4.0000e-
005

4.1600e-
003

3.0000e-
005

4.2000e-
003

1.1100e-
003

3.0000e-
005

1.1400e-
003

0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004

0.0000 3.7607
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.1741 0.0000 0.1741 0.0693 0.0000 0.0693 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003

0.0377 0.0377 0.0347 0.0347 0.0000 103.5403 103.5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775 Total 0.0796 0.8816 0.5867 1.1800e-
003

0.1741 0.0377 0.2118 0.0693 0.0347 0.1040 0.0000 103.5403 103.5403 0.0335 0.0000 104.3775 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 15 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-477

3.4 Grading - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.6400e-
003

1.2700e-
003

0.0144 4.0000e-
005

4.1600e-
003

3.0000e-
005

4.2000e-
003

1.1100e-
003

3.0000e-
005

1.1400e-
003

0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004

0.0000 3.7607
Total 1.6400e-
003

1.2700e-
003

0.0144 4.0000e-
005

4.1600e-
003

3.0000e-
005

4.2000e-
003

1.1100e-
003

3.0000e-
005

1.1400e-
003

0.0000 3.7579 3.7579 1.1000e-
004

0.0000 3.7607
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0807 0.0000 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004

5.7200e-
003

5.7200e-
003

5.2600e-
003

5.2600e-
003

0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003

0.0000 19.2414
Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004

0.0807 5.7200e-
003

0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e-
003

0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003

0.0000 19.2414
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 16 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-478

3.4 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.8000e-
004

2.1000e-
004

2.4400e-
003

1.0000e-
005

7.7000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

7.7000e-
004

2.0000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

2.1000e-
004

0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.6684
Total 2.8000e-
004

2.1000e-
004

2.4400e-
003

1.0000e-
005

7.7000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

7.7000e-
004

2.0000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

2.1000e-
004

0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.6684
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0807 0.0000 0.0807 0.0180 0.0000 0.0180 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004

5.7200e-
003

5.7200e-
003

5.2600e-
003

5.2600e-
003

0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003

0.0000 19.2414
Total 0.0127 0.1360 0.1017 2.2000e-
004

0.0807 5.7200e-
003

0.0865 0.0180 5.2600e-
003

0.0233 0.0000 19.0871 19.0871 6.1700e-
003

0.0000 19.2414
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 17 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-479

3.4 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.8000e-
004

2.1000e-
004

2.4400e-
003

1.0000e-
005

7.7000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

7.7000e-
004

2.0000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

2.1000e-
004

0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.6684
Total 2.8000e-
004

2.1000e-
004

2.4400e-
003

1.0000e-
005

7.7000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

7.7000e-
004

2.0000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

2.1000e-
004

0.0000 0.6679 0.6679 2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.6684
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003

0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881 Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003

0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1324 293.1324 0.0702 0.0000 294.8881 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 18 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-480

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0527 1.6961 0.4580 4.5500e-
003

0.1140 3.1800e-
003

0.1171 0.0329 3.0400e-
003

0.0359 0.0000 441.9835 441.9835 0.0264 0.0000 442.6435
Worker 0.4088 0.3066 3.5305 0.0107 1.1103 8.8700e-
003

1.1192 0.2949 8.1700e-
003

0.3031 0.0000 966.8117 966.8117 0.0266 0.0000 967.4773
Total 0.4616 2.0027 3.9885 0.0152 1.2243 0.0121 1.2363 0.3278 0.0112 0.3390 0.0000 1,408.795 2 1,408.795
2 0.0530 0.0000 1,410.120
8 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003

0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877 Total 0.2158 1.9754 2.0700 3.4100e-
003

0.1023 0.1023 0.0963 0.0963 0.0000 293.1321 293.1321 0.0702 0.0000 294.8877 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 19 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-481

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0527 1.6961 0.4580 4.5500e-
003

0.1140 3.1800e-
003

0.1171 0.0329 3.0400e-
003

0.0359 0.0000 441.9835 441.9835 0.0264 0.0000 442.6435
Worker 0.4088 0.3066 3.5305 0.0107 1.1103 8.8700e-
003

1.1192 0.2949 8.1700e-
003

0.3031 0.0000 966.8117 966.8117 0.0266 0.0000 967.4773
Total 0.4616 2.0027 3.9885 0.0152 1.2243 0.0121 1.2363 0.3278 0.0112 0.3390 0.0000 1,408.795 2 1,408.795
2 0.0530 0.0000 1,410.120
8 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003

0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286.2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814 Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003

0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2789 286.2789 0.0681 0.0000 287.9814 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 20 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-482

3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0382 1.2511 0.4011 4.3000e-
003

0.1113 1.4600e-
003

0.1127 0.0321 1.4000e-
003

0.0335 0.0000 417.9930 417.9930 0.0228 0.0000 418.5624
Worker 0.3753 0.2708 3.1696 0.0101 1.0840 8.4100e-
003

1.0924 0.2879 7.7400e-
003

0.2957 0.0000 909.3439 909.3439 0.0234 0.0000 909.9291
Total 0.4135 1.5218 3.5707 0.0144 1.1953 9.8700e-
003

1.2051 0.3200 9.1400e-
003

0.3292 0.0000 1,327.336
9 1,327.336
9 0.0462 0.0000 1,328.491
6 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003

0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286.2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811 Total 0.1942 1.7765 2.0061 3.3300e-
003

0.0864 0.0864 0.0813 0.0813 0.0000 286.2785 286.2785 0.0681 0.0000 287.9811 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 21 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-483

3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0382 1.2511 0.4011 4.3000e-
003

0.1113 1.4600e-
003

0.1127 0.0321 1.4000e-
003

0.0335 0.0000 417.9930 417.9930 0.0228 0.0000 418.5624
Worker 0.3753 0.2708 3.1696 0.0101 1.0840 8.4100e-
003

1.0924 0.2879 7.7400e-
003

0.2957 0.0000 909.3439 909.3439 0.0234 0.0000 909.9291
Total 0.4135 1.5218 3.5707 0.0144 1.1953 9.8700e-
003

1.2051 0.3200 9.1400e-
003

0.3292 0.0000 1,327.336
9 1,327.336
9 0.0462 0.0000 1,328.491
6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 6.7100e-
003

0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004

3.3200e-
003

3.3200e-
003

3.0500e-
003

3.0500e-
003

0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003

0.0000 13.1227
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 6.7100e-
003

0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004

3.3200e-
003

3.3200e-
003

3.0500e-
003

3.0500e-
003

0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003

0.0000 13.1227
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 22 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-484

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.7000e-
004

2.7000e-
004

3.1200e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.0800e-
003

2.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

2.9000e-
004

0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.8968
Total 3.7000e-
004

2.7000e-
004

3.1200e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.0800e-
003

2.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

2.9000e-
004

0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.8968
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 6.7100e-
003

0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004

3.3200e-
003

3.3200e-
003

3.0500e-
003

3.0500e-
003

0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003

0.0000 13.1227
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 6.7100e-
003

0.0663 0.0948 1.5000e-
004

3.3200e-
003

3.3200e-
003

3.0500e-
003

3.0500e-
003

0.0000 13.0175 13.0175 4.2100e-
003

0.0000 13.1227
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 23 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-485

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.7000e-
004

2.7000e-
004

3.1200e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.0800e-
003

2.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

2.9000e-
004

0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.8968
Total 3.7000e-
004

2.7000e-
004

3.1200e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.0800e-
003

2.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

2.9000e-
004

0.0000 0.8963 0.8963 2.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.8968
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004

5.1500e-
003

5.1500e-
003

4.7400e-
003

4.7400e-
003

0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003

0.0000 22.2073
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004

5.1500e-
003

5.1500e-
003

4.7400e-
003

4.7400e-
003

0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003

0.0000 22.2073
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 24 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-486

3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.9000e-
004

4.1000e-
004

4.9200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.8100e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.8200e-
003

4.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.9000e-
004

0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005

0.0000 1.4706
Total 5.9000e-
004

4.1000e-
004

4.9200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.8100e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.8200e-
003

4.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.9000e-
004

0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005

0.0000 1.4706
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004

5.1500e-
003

5.1500e-
003

4.7400e-
003

4.7400e-
003

0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003

0.0000 22.2073
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0109 0.1048 0.1609 2.5000e-
004

5.1500e-
003

5.1500e-
003

4.7400e-
003

4.7400e-
003

0.0000 22.0292 22.0292 7.1200e-
003

0.0000 22.2073
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 25 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-487

3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.9000e-
004

4.1000e-
004

4.9200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.8100e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.8200e-
003

4.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.9000e-
004

0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005

0.0000 1.4706
Total 5.9000e-
004

4.1000e-
004

4.9200e-
003

2.0000e-
005

1.8100e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.8200e-
003

4.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.9000e-
004

0.0000 1.4697 1.4697 4.0000e-
005

0.0000 1.4706
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1600e-
003

0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004

0.0000 4.4745
Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004

0.0000 4.4745
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 26 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-488

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0101 6.9900e-
003

0.0835 2.8000e-
004

0.0307 2.3000e-
004

0.0309 8.1500e-
003

2.2000e-
004

8.3700e-
003

0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004

0.0000 24.9558
Total 0.0101 6.9900e-
003

0.0835 2.8000e-
004

0.0307 2.3000e-
004

0.0309 8.1500e-
003

2.2000e-
004

8.3700e-
003

0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004

0.0000 24.9558
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 4.1372 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1600e-
003

0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004

0.0000 4.4745
Total 4.1404 0.0213 0.0317 5.0000e-
005

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

1.0700e-
003

0.0000 4.4682 4.4682 2.5000e-
004

0.0000 4.4745
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 27 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-489

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0101 6.9900e-
003

0.0835 2.8000e-
004

0.0307 2.3000e-
004

0.0309 8.1500e-
003

2.2000e-
004

8.3700e-
003

0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004

0.0000 24.9558
Total 0.0101 6.9900e-
003

0.0835 2.8000e-
004

0.0307 2.3000e-
004

0.0309 8.1500e-
003

2.2000e-
004

8.3700e-
003

0.0000 24.9407 24.9407 6.1000e-
004

0.0000 24.9558
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 28 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-490
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498 6 7,620.498
6 0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2 Unmitigated 1.5857 7.9962 19.1834 0.0821 7.7979 0.0580 7.8559 2.0895 0.0539 2.1434 0.0000 7,620.498 6 7,620.498
6 0.3407 0.0000 7,629.016
2 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227 Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065 General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812 High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937 Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488 Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221 Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 29 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-491
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4 High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)

16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44 Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11

5.0 Energy Detail

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)

0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 30 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-492
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2,512.646
5 2,512.646
5 0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6 Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2,512.646
5 2,512.646
5 0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6 NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003

0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
7 1,383.426
7 0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003

0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
7 1,383.426
7 0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 31 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-493

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
408494 2.2000e-
003

0.0188 8.0100e-
003

1.2000e-
004

1.5200e-
003

1.5200e-
003

1.5200e-
003

1.5200e-
003

0.0000 21.7988 21.7988 4.2000e-
004

4.0000e-
004

21.9284
Apartments Mid
Rise

1.30613e
+007

0.0704 0.6018 0.2561 3.8400e-
003

0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 696.9989 696.9989 0.0134 0.0128 701.1408 General Office
Building
468450 2.5300e-
003

0.0230 0.0193 1.4000e-
004

1.7500e-
003

1.7500e-
003

1.7500e-
003

1.7500e-
003

0.0000 24.9983 24.9983 4.8000e-
004

4.6000e-
004

25.1468
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

8.30736e
+006

0.0448 0.4072 0.3421 2.4400e-
003

0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 443.3124 443.3124 8.5000e- 003

8.1300e-
003
445.9468
Hotel 1.74095e
+006

9.3900e-
003

0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e-
004

6.4900e-
003

6.4900e-
003

6.4900e-
003

6.4900e-
003

0.0000 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e-
003

1.7000e-
003

93.4557
Quality
Restaurant

1.84608e
+006

9.9500e-
003

0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e-
004

6.8800e-
003

6.8800e-
003

6.8800e-
003

6.8800e-
003

0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e-
003

1.8100e-
003

99.0993
Regional
Shopping Center
91840 5.0000e-
004

4.5000e-
003

3.7800e-
003

3.0000e-
005

3.4000e-
004

3.4000e-
004

3.4000e-
004

3.4000e-
004

0.0000 4.9009 4.9009 9.0000e-
005

9.0000e-
005

4.9301
Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003

0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
8 1,383.426
8 0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 32 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-494

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
408494 2.2000e-
003

0.0188 8.0100e-
003

1.2000e-
004

1.5200e-
003

1.5200e-
003

1.5200e-
003

1.5200e-
003

0.0000 21.7988 21.7988 4.2000e-
004

4.0000e-
004

21.9284
Apartments Mid
Rise

1.30613e
+007

0.0704 0.6018 0.2561 3.8400e-
003

0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 696.9989 696.9989 0.0134 0.0128 701.1408 General Office
Building
468450 2.5300e-
003

0.0230 0.0193 1.4000e-
004

1.7500e-
003

1.7500e-
003

1.7500e-
003

1.7500e-
003

0.0000 24.9983 24.9983 4.8000e-
004

4.6000e-
004

25.1468
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

8.30736e
+006

0.0448 0.4072 0.3421 2.4400e-
003

0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0310 0.0000 443.3124 443.3124 8.5000e- 003

8.1300e-
003
445.9468
Hotel 1.74095e
+006

9.3900e-
003

0.0853 0.0717 5.1000e-
004

6.4900e-
003

6.4900e-
003

6.4900e-
003

6.4900e-
003

0.0000 92.9036 92.9036 1.7800e-
003

1.7000e-
003

93.4557
Quality
Restaurant

1.84608e
+006

9.9500e-
003

0.0905 0.0760 5.4000e-
004

6.8800e-
003

6.8800e-
003

6.8800e-
003

6.8800e-
003

0.0000 98.5139 98.5139 1.8900e-
003

1.8100e-
003

99.0993
Regional
Shopping Center
91840 5.0000e-
004

4.5000e-
003

3.7800e-
003

3.0000e-
005

3.4000e-
004

3.4000e-
004

3.4000e-
004

3.4000e-
004

0.0000 4.9009 4.9009 9.0000e-
005

9.0000e-
005

4.9301
Total 0.1398 1.2312 0.7770 7.6200e-
003

0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966 0.0000 1,383.426
8 1,383.426
8 0.0265 0.0254 1,391.647
8 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 33 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-495

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
106010 33.7770 1.3900e-
003

2.9000e-
004

33.8978
Apartments Mid
Rise

3.94697e
+006
1,257.587
9 0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086
9 General Office
Building
584550 186.2502 7.6900e-
003

1.5900e-
003
186.9165
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

1.58904e
+006
506.3022 0.0209 4.3200e-
003
508.1135
Hotel 550308 175.3399 7.2400e-
003

1.5000e-
003
175.9672
Quality
Restaurant
353120 112.5116 4.6500e-
003

9.6000e-
004
112.9141
Regional
Shopping Center
756000 240.8778 9.9400e-
003

2.0600e-
003
241.7395
Total 2,512.646
5 0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 34 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-496

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
106010 33.7770 1.3900e-
003

2.9000e-
004

33.8978
Apartments Mid
Rise

3.94697e
+006
1,257.587
9 0.0519 0.0107 1,262.086
9 General Office
Building
584550 186.2502 7.6900e-
003

1.5900e-
003
186.9165
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

1.58904e
+006
506.3022 0.0209 4.3200e-
003
508.1135
Hotel 550308 175.3399 7.2400e-
003

1.5000e-
003
175.9672
Quality
Restaurant
353120 112.5116 4.6500e-
003

9.6000e-
004
112.9141
Regional
Shopping Center
756000 240.8778 9.9400e-
003

2.0600e-
003
241.7395
Total 2,512.646
5 0.1037 0.0215 2,521.635
6 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 35 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-497
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003

0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e- 003
222.5835
Unmitigated 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6700e-
003

0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e- 003
222.5835

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

0.4137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

4.3998 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 0.0206 0.1763 0.0750 1.1200e-
003

0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0000 204.1166 204.1166 3.9100e- 003

3.7400e-
003
205.3295
Landscaping 0.3096 0.1187 10.3054 5.4000e-
004

0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540 Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e-
003

0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e- 003
222.5835
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 36 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-498

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

0.4137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

4.3998 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 0.0206 0.1763 0.0750 1.1200e-
003

0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0000 204.1166 204.1166 3.9100e- 003

3.7400e-
003
205.3295
Landscaping 0.3096 0.1187 10.3054 5.4000e-
004

0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0572 0.0000 16.8504 16.8504 0.0161 0.0000 17.2540 Total 5.1437 0.2950 10.3804 1.6600e-
003

0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0714 0.0000 220.9670 220.9670 0.0201 3.7400e- 003
222.5835
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 37 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-499
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Unmitigated 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 38 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-500

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise

1.62885 /

1.02688

10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e-
003

12.6471
Apartments Mid
Rise

63.5252 /

40.0485
425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363
General Office
Building

7.99802 /

4.90201

53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e-
003

61.6019
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

10.9272 /

0.697482

51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e-
003

62.8482
Hotel 1.26834 /

0.140927

6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e-
003

7.5079
Quality
Restaurant

2.42827 /

0.154996

11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e-
003

13.9663
Regional
Shopping Center

4.14806 /

2.54236

27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e-
003

31.9490
Total 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 39 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-501

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise

1.62885 /

1.02688

10.9095 0.0535 1.3400e-
003

12.6471
Apartments Mid
Rise

63.5252 /

40.0485
425.4719 2.0867 0.0523 493.2363
General Office
Building

7.99802 /

4.90201

53.0719 0.2627 6.5900e-
003

61.6019
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

10.9272 /

0.697482

51.2702 0.3580 8.8200e-
003

62.8482
Hotel 1.26834 /

0.140927

6.1633 0.0416 1.0300e-
003

7.5079
Quality
Restaurant

2.42827 /

0.154996

11.3934 0.0796 1.9600e-
003

13.9663
Regional
Shopping Center

4.14806 /

2.54236

27.5250 0.1363 3.4200e-
003

31.9490
Total 585.8052 3.0183 0.0755 683.7567
Mitigated

8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 40 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-502
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Unmitigated 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 41 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-503

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise

11.5 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834
Apartments Mid
Rise
448.5 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 225.5513
General Office
Building

41.85 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 21.0464
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
428.4 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430
Hotel 27.38 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 13.7694
Quality
Restaurant

7.3 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712
Regional
Shopping Center

58.8 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706
Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 42 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-504

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise

11.5 2.3344 0.1380 0.0000 5.7834
Apartments Mid
Rise
448.5 91.0415 5.3804 0.0000 225.5513
General Office
Building

41.85 8.4952 0.5021 0.0000 21.0464
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
428.4 86.9613 5.1393 0.0000 215.4430
Hotel 27.38 5.5579 0.3285 0.0000 13.7694
Quality
Restaurant

7.3 1.4818 0.0876 0.0000 3.6712
Regional
Shopping Center

58.8 11.9359 0.7054 0.0000 29.5706
Total 207.8079 12.2811 0.0000 514.8354
Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 43 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-505

11.0 Vegetation
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:52 PMPage 44 of 44 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual ATTACHMENT 12-506

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0 High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0 Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72 Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789 Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9 Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 1 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-507
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.

Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.

Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.

Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.

Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.

Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.

Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.

Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 2 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-508

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 3 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-509

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2021 4.2769 46.4588 31.6840 0.0643 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 6,234.797 4 6,234.797
4 1.9495 0.0000 6,283.535
2 2022 5.3304 38.8967 49.5629 0.1517 9.8688 1.6366 10.7727 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0.0000 15,251.56 74 15,251.56
74 1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88 2023 4.8957 26.3317 46.7567 0.1472 9.8688 0.7794 10.6482 2.6381 0.7322 3.3702 0.0000 14,807.52 69 14,807.52
69 1.0250 0.0000 14,833.15
21 2024 237.1630 9.5575 15.1043 0.0244 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0.0000 2,361.398 9 2,361.398
9 0.7177 0.0000 2,379.342
1 Maximum 237.1630 46.4588 49.5629 0.1517 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 15,251.56 74 15,251.56
74 1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88 Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 4 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-510

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2021 4.2769 46.4588 31.6840 0.0643 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 6,234.797 4 6,234.797
4 1.9495 0.0000 6,283.535
2 2022 5.3304 38.8967 49.5629 0.1517 9.8688 1.6366 10.7727 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0.0000 15,251.56 74 15,251.56
74 1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88 2023 4.8957 26.3317 46.7567 0.1472 9.8688 0.7794 10.6482 2.6381 0.7322 3.3702 0.0000 14,807.52 69 14,807.52
69 1.0250 0.0000 14,833.15
20 2024 237.1630 9.5575 15.1043 0.0244 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0.0000 2,361.398 9 2,361.398
9 0.7177 0.0000 2,379.342
1 Maximum 237.1630 46.4588 49.5629 0.1517 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 15,251.56 74 15,251.56
74 1.9503 0.0000 15,278.52
88 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 5 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-511

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 50 18,148.59
50 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92 Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 2 8,355.983
2 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7 Mobile 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60 34 50,306.60
34 2.1807 50,361.12
08 Total 41.1168 67.2262 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18 16 76,811.18
16 2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87
86 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 50 18,148.59
50 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92 Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 2 8,355.983
2 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7 Mobile 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60 34 50,306.60
34 2.1807 50,361.12
08 Total 41.1168 67.2262 207.5497 0.6278 45.9592 2.4626 48.4217 12.2950 2.4385 14.7336 0.0000 76,811.18 16 76,811.18
16 2.8282 0.4832 77,025.87
86 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 6 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-512

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20 3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500 5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35 OffRoad Equipment
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 7 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-513
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 8 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-514

3.2 Demolition - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 3,747.944 9 3,747.944
9 1.0549 3,774.317
4 Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 3,747.944 9 3,747.944
9 1.0549 3,774.317
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 9 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-515

3.2 Demolition - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241 3 1,292.241
3 0.0877 1,294.433
7 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0643 0.0442 0.6042 1.7100e-
003

0.1677 1.3500e-
003

0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003

0.0457 170.8155 170.8155 5.0300e-
003
170.9413
Total 0.1916 4.1394 1.5644 0.0136 0.4346 0.0139 0.4485 0.1176 0.0133 0.1309 1,463.056 8 1,463.056
8 0.0927 1,465.375
0 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 3,747.944 9 3,747.944
9 1.0549 3,774.317
4 Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 0.0000 3,747.944 9 3,747.944
9 1.0549 3,774.317
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 10 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-516

3.2 Demolition - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.1273 4.0952 0.9602 0.0119 0.2669 0.0126 0.2795 0.0732 0.0120 0.0852 1,292.241 3 1,292.241
3 0.0877 1,294.433
7 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0643 0.0442 0.6042 1.7100e-
003

0.1677 1.3500e-
003

0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003

0.0457 170.8155 170.8155 5.0300e-
003
170.9413
Total 0.1916 4.1394 1.5644 0.0136 0.4346 0.0139 0.4485 0.1176 0.0133 0.1309 1,463.056 8 1,463.056
8 0.0927 1,465.375
0 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 3,685.656 9 3,685.656
9 1.1920 3,715.457
3 Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 3,685.656 9 3,685.656
9 1.1920 3,715.457
3 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 11 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-517

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2.0600e-
003

0.2012 1.6300e-
003

0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003

0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
Total 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2.0600e-
003

0.2012 1.6300e-
003

0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003

0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 3,685.656 9 3,685.656
9 1.1920 3,715.457
3 Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 0.0000 3,685.656 9 3,685.656
9 1.1920 3,715.457
3 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 12 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-518

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2.0600e-
003

0.2012 1.6300e-
003

0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003

0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
Total 0.0772 0.0530 0.7250 2.0600e-
003

0.2012 1.6300e-
003

0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003

0.0549 204.9786 204.9786 6.0400e-
003
205.1296
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Grading - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 6,007.043 4 6,007.043
4 1.9428 6,055.613
4 Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 6,007.043 4 6,007.043
4 1.9428 6,055.613
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 13 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-519

3.4 Grading - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2.2900e-
003

0.2236 1.8100e-
003

0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003

0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
Total 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2.2900e-
003

0.2236 1.8100e-
003

0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003

0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 6,007.043 4 6,007.043
4 1.9428 6,055.613
4 Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 0.0000 6,007.043 4 6,007.043
4 1.9428 6,055.613
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 14 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-520

3.4 Grading - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2.2900e-
003

0.2236 1.8100e-
003

0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003

0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
Total 0.0857 0.0589 0.8056 2.2900e-
003

0.2236 1.8100e-
003

0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003

0.0610 227.7540 227.7540 6.7100e-
003
227.9217
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 15 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-521

3.4 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2.2100e-
003

0.2236 1.7500e-
003

0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003

0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
Total 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2.2100e-
003

0.2236 1.7500e-
003

0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003

0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 0.0000 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 16 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-522

3.4 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2.2100e-
003

0.2236 1.7500e-
003

0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003

0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
Total 0.0803 0.0532 0.7432 2.2100e-
003

0.2236 1.7500e-
003

0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003

0.0609 219.7425 219.7425 6.0600e-
003
219.8941
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 17 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-523

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.4079 13.2032 3.4341 0.0364 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548 2 3,896.548
2 0.2236 3,902.138
4 Worker 3.2162 2.1318 29.7654 0.0883 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,800.685 7 8,800.685
7 0.2429 8,806.758
2 Total 3.6242 15.3350 33.1995 0.1247 9.8688 0.0949 9.9637 2.6381 0.0883 2.7263 12,697.23 39 12,697.23
39 0.4665 12,708.89
66 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 18 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-524

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.4079 13.2032 3.4341 0.0364 0.9155 0.0248 0.9404 0.2636 0.0237 0.2873 3,896.548 2 3,896.548
2 0.2236 3,902.138
4 Worker 3.2162 2.1318 29.7654 0.0883 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,800.685 7 8,800.685
7 0.2429 8,806.758
2 Total 3.6242 15.3350 33.1995 0.1247 9.8688 0.0949 9.9637 2.6381 0.0883 2.7263 12,697.23 39 12,697.23
39 0.4665 12,708.89
66 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 19 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-525

3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.3027 10.0181 3.1014 0.0352 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 3,773.876 2 3,773.876
2 0.1982 3,778.830
0 Worker 3.0203 1.9287 27.4113 0.0851 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 8,478.440 8 8,478.440
8 0.2190 8,483.916
0 Total 3.3229 11.9468 30.5127 0.1203 9.8688 0.0797 9.9485 2.6381 0.0738 2.7118 12,252.31 70 12,252.31
70 0.4172 12,262.74
60 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 20 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-526

3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.3027 10.0181 3.1014 0.0352 0.9156 0.0116 0.9271 0.2636 0.0111 0.2747 3,773.876 2 3,773.876
2 0.1982 3,778.830
0 Worker 3.0203 1.9287 27.4113 0.0851 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 8,478.440 8 8,478.440
8 0.2190 8,483.916
0 Total 3.3229 11.9468 30.5127 0.1203 9.8688 0.0797 9.9485 2.6381 0.0738 2.7118 12,252.31 70 12,252.31
70 0.4172 12,262.74
60 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 21 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-527

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1.5900e-
003

0.1677 1.2800e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003

0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
Total 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1.5900e-
003

0.1677 1.2800e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003

0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 22 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-528

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1.5900e-
003

0.1677 1.2800e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003

0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
Total 0.0566 0.0361 0.5133 1.5900e-
003

0.1677 1.2800e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003

0.0456 158.7723 158.7723 4.1000e-
003
158.8748
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 2 2,207.547
2 0.7140 2,225.396
3 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 2 2,207.547
2 0.7140 2,225.396
3 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 23 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-529

3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1.5400e-
003

0.1677 1.2600e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003

0.0456 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
Total 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1.5400e-
003

0.1677 1.2600e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003

0.0456 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547 2 2,207.547
2 0.7140 2,225.396
3 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547 2 2,207.547
2 0.7140 2,225.396
3 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 24 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-530

3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1.5400e-
003

0.1677 1.2600e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003

0.0456 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
Total 0.0535 0.0329 0.4785 1.5400e-
003

0.1677 1.2600e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003

0.0456 153.8517 153.8517 3.7600e-
003
153.9458
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003

0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003

0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 25 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-531

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085 2 1,641.085
2 0.0401 1,642.088
6 Total 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085 2 1,641.085
2 0.0401 1,642.088
6 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003

0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Total 236.5923 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003

0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 26 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-532

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085 2 1,641.085
2 0.0401 1,642.088
6 Total 0.5707 0.3513 5.1044 0.0165 1.7884 0.0134 1.8018 0.4743 0.0123 0.4866 1,641.085 2 1,641.085
2 0.0401 1,642.088
6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 27 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-533
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60 34 50,306.60
34 2.1807 50,361.12
08 Unmitigated 9.8489 45.4304 114.8495 0.4917 45.9592 0.3360 46.2951 12.2950 0.3119 12.6070 50,306.60 34 50,306.60
34 2.1807 50,361.12
08 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Low Rise 145.75 154.25 154.00 506,227 506,227 Apartments Mid Rise 4,026.75 3,773.25 4075.50 13,660,065 13,660,065 General Office Building 288.45 62.55 31.05 706,812 706,812 High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 2,368.80 2,873.52 2817.72 3,413,937 3,413,937 Hotel 192.00 187.50 160.00 445,703 445,703
Quality Restaurant 501.12 511.92 461.20 707,488 707,488 Regional Shopping Center 528.08 601.44 357.84 1,112,221 1,112,221 Total 8,050.95 8,164.43 8,057.31 20,552,452 20,552,452
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 28 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-534
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Low Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4 High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)

16.60 8.40 6.90 8.50 72.50 19.00 37 20 43
Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4
Quality Restaurant 16.60 8.40 6.90 12.00 69.00 19.00 38 18 44 Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30 64.70 19.00 54 35 11

5.0 Energy Detail

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Apartments Low Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 Apartments Mid Rise 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 General Office Building 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 High Turnover (Sit Down
Restaurant)

0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 Hotel 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 Quality Restaurant 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 Regional Shopping Center 0.543088 0.044216 0.209971 0.116369 0.014033 0.006332 0.021166 0.033577 0.002613 0.001817 0.005285 0.000712 0.000821 Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 29 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-535
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 2 8,355.983
2 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 2 8,355.983
2 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 30 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-536

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Apartments Low
Rise
1119.16 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004

8.3400e-
003

8.3400e-
003

8.3400e-
003

8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003

2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise
35784.3 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916 4 4,209.916
4 0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9 General Office
Building
1283.42 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004

9.5600e-
003

9.5600e-
003

9.5600e-
003

9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003

2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)
22759.9 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634 2 2,677.634
2 0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0 Hotel 4769.72 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003

0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782 Quality
Restaurant
5057.75 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003

0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658 Regional
Shopping Center
251.616 2.7100e-
003

0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004

1.8700e-
003

1.8700e-
003

1.8700e-
003

1.8700e-
003

29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004

5.4000e-
004

29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 2 8,355.983
2 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 31 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-537

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Apartments Low
Rise

1.11916 0.0121 0.1031 0.0439 6.6000e-
004

8.3400e-
003

8.3400e-
003

8.3400e-
003

8.3400e-
003
131.6662 131.6662 2.5200e-
003

2.4100e-
003
132.4486
Apartments Mid
Rise

35.7843 0.3859 3.2978 1.4033 0.0211 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 0.2666 4,209.916 4 4,209.916
4 0.0807 0.0772 4,234.933
9 General Office
Building

1.28342 0.0138 0.1258 0.1057 7.5000e-
004

9.5600e-
003

9.5600e-
003

9.5600e-
003

9.5600e-
003
150.9911 150.9911 2.8900e-
003

2.7700e-
003
151.8884
High Turnover (Sit
Down Restaurant)

22.7599 0.2455 2.2314 1.8743 0.0134 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 0.1696 2,677.634 2 2,677.634
2 0.0513 0.0491 2,693.546
0 Hotel 4.76972 0.0514 0.4676 0.3928 2.8100e-
003

0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 0.0355 561.1436 561.1436 0.0108 0.0103 564.4782 Quality
Restaurant

5.05775 0.0545 0.4959 0.4165 2.9800e-
003

0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 0.0377 595.0298 595.0298 0.0114 0.0109 598.5658 Regional
Shopping Center

0.251616 2.7100e-
003

0.0247 0.0207 1.5000e-
004

1.8700e-
003

1.8700e-
003

1.8700e-
003

1.8700e-
003

29.6019 29.6019 5.7000e-
004

5.4000e-
004

29.7778
Total 0.7660 6.7463 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 2 8,355.983
2 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 32 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-538
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 50 18,148.59
50 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92 Unmitigated 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 50 18,148.59
50 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92 6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0.0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0.0000 18,000.00 00 18,000.00
00 0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50 Landscaping 2.4766 0.9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003

0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542 Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 50 18,148.59
50 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 33 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-539

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

8.0 Waste Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

2.2670 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

24.1085 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 1.6500 14.1000 6.0000 0.0900 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 1.1400 0.0000 18,000.00 00 18,000.00
00 0.3450 0.3300 18,106.96
50 Landscaping 2.4766 0.9496 82.4430 4.3600e-
003

0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 0.4574 148.5950 148.5950 0.1424 152.1542 Total 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 50 18,148.59
50 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92 Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 34 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-540

11.0 Vegetation
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:54 PMPage 35 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer ATTACHMENT 12-541

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 45.00 1000sqft 1.03 45,000.00 0 High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 36.00 1000sqft 0.83 36,000.00 0 Hotel 50.00 Room 1.67 72,600.00 0
Quality Restaurant 8.00 1000sqft 0.18 8,000.00 0
Apartments Low Rise 25.00 Dwelling Unit 1.56 25,000.00 72 Apartments Mid Rise 975.00 Dwelling Unit 25.66 975,000.00 2789 Regional Shopping Center 56.00 1000sqft 1.29 56,000.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9 Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 33

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Southern California Edison
2028Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
702.44 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Village South Specific Plan (Proposed)
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 1 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-542
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Land Use - See SWAPE comment regarding residential and retail land uses.

Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment regarding individual construction phase lengths.

Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding demolition.

Vehicle Trips - Saturday trips consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding weekday and Sunday trips.

Woodstoves - Woodstoves and wood-burning fireplaces consistent with the DEIR's model. See SWAPE comment regarding gas fireplaces.

Energy Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - See SWAPE comment on construction-related mitigation.

Area Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.

Water Mitigation - See SWAPE comment regarding operational mitigation measures.

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 1.25 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 48.75 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.16 6.17
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 3.87
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 1.39
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 158.37 79.82
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 3.75
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 94.36 63.99
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 49.97 10.74
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.07 6.16
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 4.18
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 0.69
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 131.84 78.27
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 2 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-543

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 3.20
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 72.16 57.65
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 25.24 6.39
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.59 5.83
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 4.13
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 6.41
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 127.15 65.80
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.84
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 89.95 62.64
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 42.70 9.43
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 1.25 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 48.75 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 3 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-544

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2021 4.2865 46.4651 31.6150 0.0642 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 6,221.493 7 6,221.493
7 1.9491 0.0000 6,270.221
4 2022 5.7218 38.9024 47.3319 0.1455 9.8688 1.6366 10.7736 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0.0000 14,630.30 99 14,630.30
99 1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63 2023 5.2705 26.4914 44.5936 0.1413 9.8688 0.7800 10.6488 2.6381 0.7328 3.3708 0.0000 14,210.34 24 14,210.34
24 1.0230 0.0000 14,235.91
60 2024 237.2328 9.5610 15.0611 0.0243 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0.0000 2,352.417 8 2,352.417
8 0.7175 0.0000 2,370.355
0 Maximum 237.2328 46.4651 47.3319 0.1455 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 14,630.30 99 14,630.30
99 1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63 Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 4 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-545

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2021 4.2865 46.4651 31.6150 0.0642 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 6,221.493 7 6,221.493
7 1.9491 0.0000 6,270.221
4 2022 5.7218 38.9024 47.3319 0.1455 9.8688 1.6366 10.7736 3.6558 1.5057 5.1615 0.0000 14,630.30 99 14,630.30
99 1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63 2023 5.2705 26.4914 44.5936 0.1413 9.8688 0.7800 10.6488 2.6381 0.7328 3.3708 0.0000 14,210.34 24 14,210.34
24 1.0230 0.0000 14,235.91
60 2024 237.2328 9.5610 15.0611 0.0243 1.7884 0.4698 1.8628 0.4743 0.4322 0.5476 0.0000 2,352.417 8 2,352.417
8 0.7175 0.0000 2,370.355
0 Maximum 237.2328 46.4651 47.3319 0.1455 18.2675 2.0461 20.3135 9.9840 1.8824 11.8664 0.0000 14,630.30 99 14,630.30
99 1.9499 0.0000 14,657.26
63 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 5 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-546

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 50 18,148.59
50 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92 Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 2 8,355.983
2 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7 Mobile 9.5233 45.9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80 05 47,917.80
05 2.1953 47,972.68
39 Total 40.7912 67.7872 202.7424 0.6043 45.9592 2.4640 48.4231 12.2950 2.4399 14.7349 0.0000 74,422.37 87 74,422.37
87 2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44
17 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 30.5020 15.0496 88.4430 0.0944 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 1.5974 0.0000 18,148.59 50 18,148.59
50 0.4874 0.3300 18,259.11
92 Energy 0.7660 6.7462 4.2573 0.0418 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 0.5292 8,355.983 2 8,355.983
2 0.1602 0.1532 8,405.638
7 Mobile 9.5233 45.9914 110.0422 0.4681 45.9592 0.3373 46.2965 12.2950 0.3132 12.6083 47,917.80 05 47,917.80
05 2.1953 47,972.68
39 Total 40.7912 67.7872 202.7424 0.6043 45.9592 2.4640 48.4231 12.2950 2.4399 14.7349 0.0000 74,422.37 87 74,422.37
87 2.8429 0.4832 74,637.44
17 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 6 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-547

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2021 10/12/2021 5 30
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/13/2021 11/9/2021 5 20 3 Grading Grading 11/10/2021 1/11/2022 5 45
4 Building Construction Building Construction 1/12/2022 12/12/2023 5 500 5 Paving Paving 12/13/2023 1/30/2024 5 35
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/31/2024 3/19/2024 5 35 OffRoad Equipment
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 2,025,000; Residential Outdoor: 675,000; Non-Residential Indoor: 326,400; Non-Residential Outdoor: 108,800; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating ±sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 112.5
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 7 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-548
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 8 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-549

3.2 Demolition - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 3,747.944 9 3,747.944
9 1.0549 3,774.317
4 Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 3,747.944 9 3,747.944
9 1.0549 3,774.317
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 458.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 801.00 143.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 160.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 9 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-550

3.2 Demolition - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855 5 1,269.855
5 0.0908 1,272.125
2 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0715 0.0489 0.5524 1.6100e-
003

0.1677 1.3500e-
003

0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003

0.0457 160.8377 160.8377 4.7300e-
003
160.9560
Total 0.2019 4.1943 1.5706 0.0133 0.4346 0.0141 0.4487 0.1176 0.0135 0.1311 1,430.693 2 1,430.693
2 0.0955 1,433.081
2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 3.3074 0.0000 3.3074 0.5008 0.0000 0.5008 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 1.5513 1.5513 1.4411 1.4411 0.0000 3,747.944 9 3,747.944
9 1.0549 3,774.317
4 Total 3.1651 31.4407 21.5650 0.0388 3.3074 1.5513 4.8588 0.5008 1.4411 1.9419 0.0000 3,747.944 9 3,747.944
9 1.0549 3,774.317
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 10 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-551

3.2 Demolition - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.1304 4.1454 1.0182 0.0117 0.2669 0.0128 0.2797 0.0732 0.0122 0.0854 1,269.855 5 1,269.855
5 0.0908 1,272.125
2 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0715 0.0489 0.5524 1.6100e-
003

0.1677 1.3500e-
003

0.1690 0.0445 1.2500e-
003

0.0457 160.8377 160.8377 4.7300e-
003
160.9560
Total 0.2019 4.1943 1.5706 0.0133 0.4346 0.0141 0.4487 0.1176 0.0135 0.1311 1,430.693 2 1,430.693
2 0.0955 1,433.081
2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 3,685.656 9 3,685.656
9 1.1920 3,715.457
3 Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 3,685.656 9 3,685.656
9 1.1920 3,715.457
3 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 11 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-552

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1.9400e-
003

0.2012 1.6300e-
003

0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003

0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
Total 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1.9400e-
003

0.2012 1.6300e-
003

0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003

0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 18.0663 0.0000 18.0663 9.9307 0.0000 9.9307 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 2.0445 2.0445 1.8809 1.8809 0.0000 3,685.656 9 3,685.656
9 1.1920 3,715.457
3 Total 3.8882 40.4971 21.1543 0.0380 18.0663 2.0445 20.1107 9.9307 1.8809 11.8116 0.0000 3,685.656 9 3,685.656
9 1.1920 3,715.457
3 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 12 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-553

3.3 Site Preparation - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1.9400e-
003

0.2012 1.6300e-
003

0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003

0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
Total 0.0858 0.0587 0.6629 1.9400e-
003

0.2012 1.6300e-
003

0.2028 0.0534 1.5000e-
003

0.0549 193.0052 193.0052 5.6800e-
003
193.1472
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Grading - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 6,007.043 4 6,007.043
4 1.9428 6,055.613
4 Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 6,007.043 4 6,007.043
4 1.9428 6,055.613
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 13 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-554

3.4 Grading - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003

0.2236 1.8100e-
003

0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003

0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
Total 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003

0.2236 1.8100e-
003

0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003

0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 1.9853 1.9853 1.8265 1.8265 0.0000 6,007.043 4 6,007.043
4 1.9428 6,055.613
4 Total 4.1912 46.3998 30.8785 0.0620 8.6733 1.9853 10.6587 3.5965 1.8265 5.4230 0.0000 6,007.043 4 6,007.043
4 1.9428 6,055.613
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 14 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-555

3.4 Grading - 2021
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003

0.2236 1.8100e-
003

0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003

0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
Total 0.0954 0.0652 0.7365 2.1500e-
003

0.2236 1.8100e-
003

0.2254 0.0593 1.6600e-
003

0.0610 214.4502 214.4502 6.3100e-
003
214.6080
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 15 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-556

3.4 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2.0800e-
003

0.2236 1.7500e-
003

0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003

0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
Total 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2.0800e-
003

0.2236 1.7500e-
003

0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003

0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 8.6733 0.0000 8.6733 3.5965 0.0000 3.5965 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 1.6349 1.6349 1.5041 1.5041 0.0000 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Total 3.6248 38.8435 29.0415 0.0621 8.6733 1.6349 10.3082 3.5965 1.5041 5.1006 0.0000 6,011.410 5 6,011.410
5 1.9442 6,060.015
8 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 16 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-557

3.4 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2.0800e-
003

0.2236 1.7500e-
003

0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003

0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
Total 0.0896 0.0589 0.6784 2.0800e-
003

0.2236 1.7500e-
003

0.2253 0.0593 1.6100e-
003

0.0609 206.9139 206.9139 5.7000e-
003
207.0563
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 17 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-558

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.4284 13.1673 3.8005 0.0354 0.9155 0.0256 0.9412 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075 0 3,789.075
0 0.2381 3,795.028
3 Worker 3.5872 2.3593 27.1680 0.0832 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,286.901 3 8,286.901
3 0.2282 8,292.605
8 Total 4.0156 15.5266 30.9685 0.1186 9.8688 0.0957 9.9645 2.6381 0.0891 2.7271 12,075.97 63 12,075.97
63 0.4663 12,087.63
41 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 18 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-559

3.5 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.4284 13.1673 3.8005 0.0354 0.9155 0.0256 0.9412 0.2636 0.0245 0.2881 3,789.075 0 3,789.075
0 0.2381 3,795.028
3 Worker 3.5872 2.3593 27.1680 0.0832 8.9533 0.0701 9.0234 2.3745 0.0646 2.4390 8,286.901 3 8,286.901
3 0.2282 8,292.605
8 Total 4.0156 15.5266 30.9685 0.1186 9.8688 0.0957 9.9645 2.6381 0.0891 2.7271 12,075.97 63 12,075.97
63 0.4663 12,087.63
41 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 19 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-560

3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.3183 9.9726 3.3771 0.0343 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 3,671.400 7 3,671.400
7 0.2096 3,676.641
7 Worker 3.3795 2.1338 24.9725 0.0801 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 7,983.731 8 7,983.731
8 0.2055 7,988.868
3 Total 3.6978 12.1065 28.3496 0.1144 9.8688 0.0803 9.9491 2.6381 0.0743 2.7124 11,655.13 25 11,655.13
25 0.4151 11,665.50
99 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 20 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-561

3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.3183 9.9726 3.3771 0.0343 0.9156 0.0122 0.9277 0.2636 0.0116 0.2752 3,671.400 7 3,671.400
7 0.2096 3,676.641
7 Worker 3.3795 2.1338 24.9725 0.0801 8.9533 0.0681 9.0214 2.3745 0.0627 2.4372 7,983.731 8 7,983.731
8 0.2055 7,988.868
3 Total 3.6978 12.1065 28.3496 0.1144 9.8688 0.0803 9.9491 2.6381 0.0743 2.7124 11,655.13 25 11,655.13
25 0.4151 11,665.50
99 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 21 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-562

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1.5000e-
003

0.1677 1.2800e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003

0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
Total 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1.5000e-
003

0.1677 1.2800e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003

0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.0327 10.1917 14.5842 0.0228 0.5102 0.5102 0.4694 0.4694 0.0000 2,207.584 1 2,207.584
1 0.7140 2,225.433
6 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 22 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-563

3.6 Paving - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1.5000e-
003

0.1677 1.2800e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003

0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
Total 0.0633 0.0400 0.4677 1.5000e-
003

0.1677 1.2800e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1700e-
003

0.0456 149.5081 149.5081 3.8500e-
003
149.6043
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 2 2,207.547
2 0.7140 2,225.396
3 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 2,207.547 2 2,207.547
2 0.7140 2,225.396
3 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 23 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-564

3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003

0.1677 1.2600e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003

0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
Total 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003

0.1677 1.2600e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003

0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547 2 2,207.547
2 0.7140 2,225.396
3 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.9882 9.5246 14.6258 0.0228 0.4685 0.4685 0.4310 0.4310 0.0000 2,207.547 2 2,207.547
2 0.7140 2,225.396
3 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 1/6/2021 1:49 PMPage 24 of 35 Village South Specific Plan (Proposed) - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter ATTACHMENT 12-565

3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003

0.1677 1.2600e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003

0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
Total 0.0601 0.0364 0.4354 1.4500e-
003

0.1677 1.2600e-
003

0.1689 0.0445 1.1600e-
003

0.0456 144.8706 144.8706 3.5300e-
003
144.9587
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 236.4115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003